How long did you take to find the fourth reviewer for this article? Mine is the same. The first two reviewers quickly finished their reviews, but the third reviewer hasn't given any feedback in over 30 days. I'm wondering if they have also disappeared.

(0) 讚！ | seagull47

The third round was still sent to the reviewers, which is common for the Nature series. However, luckily, the newly added reviewer agreed to accept it within three days.

(0) 讚！ | 阿贾

How long did it take to find the fourth reviewer for editing?

(0) 讚！ | seagull47

It's not easy at all, the second review only requires feedback from experts #1 and #3, expert #2 has gone missing, and now we need to add another reviewer, hoping for a lenient one!!

(0) 讚！ | WWBY

Three reviewers did not identify any obvious negative comments, but one reviewer provided detailed feedback, requesting increased rigor and repeatability in the experimental results, from experiments to simulations to mechanistic analysis.

(0) 讚！ | seagull47

Have you submitted the third review, boss, or did you directly accept without submitting it for review? Accept.

(0) 讚！ | xw111

Major revisions, do any of the reviewers have negative opinions?

(0) 讚！ | TATB

Submitted to NC, underwent major revisions during the first review, spent over four months conducting additional experiments, and wrote a response of over 70 pages. 
Two reviewers provided feedback within six days during the second review, but one has not responded for 23 days, causing some anxiety. 
Does anyone know how long this journal typically takes for peer review?

(0) 讚！ | seagull47

The reviewer cannot be found.

(0) 讚！ | 我就是你

Is there any new information?

(0) 讚！ | 何晓康

Why has it been stuck on "Contacting Potential Reviewers" for almost a month? Does anyone understand what's going on? Is this situation normal or abnormal?

Contacting Potential Reviewers 20th March 26
Manuscript under consideration 9th March 26
Editor Assigned 9th March 26
Manuscript submitted 7th March 26
Submission in process 7th March 26

(0) 讚！ | 何晓康

26.04.03 Submit. Manuscript number 27000+

(1) 讚！ | 青衫浊酒

Returned for rework.

(0) 讚！ | bzdbzdbzdb

We are now in the second round of waiting for feedback, and currently we have one response. Here is a screenshot of the first round for reference:

(0) 讚！ | MKS

All reviewers have been assigned on March 30th.

(0) 讚！ | LZ8751

Then you can give it a try to see if it's suitable. I think the whole process is relatively not easy, I have been working on it for 3 years, it has a certain level of innovation, and the workload is also large, my SP is already 69 pages. Both reviewers are positive, the third reviewer did not clearly reject it, and only raised 6 questions. The three reviewers together only raised a total of 18 questions, and 3 of them are minor formatting issues. Therefore, the editor decided to give a major revision, which is also reasonable.

(2) 讚！ | 阿贾

Manuscript under consideration 20th March 26
Contacting Potential Reviewers 20th March 26

(0) 讚！ | LZ8751

One negative, but none were directly rejected. It seems that saying NC is a low-quality journal among the sub-journals is not entirely wrong.

(0) 讚！ | yijinsha

Today the principle has been accepted, finally I can graduate smoothly.

(0) 讚！ | 阿贾

I am almost in the same situation as you. It's already the third round, and after chasing for the submission, the editor told me they went on vacation. I don't know how long I have to wait.

(0) 讚！ | Jing30

The reviewer agreed to accept it in just 2 days, but then the UK went on holiday, the editor went on holiday, and the long wait began again.

(0) 讚！ | 阿贾

Manuscript under consideration 16th March 26
Editor Assigned 16th March 26
Manuscript submitted 12th March 26
Submission in process 12th March 26
Manuscript Transferred 12th March 26

(0) 讚！ | LZ8751

Editorial decision: revise on January 20, 2026.
Resubmit on February 6, 2026.
Accept in principle on March 4, 2026.

(0) 讚！ | Jay_ME

Submitted in early July, the first round of review lasted for two months, with two positive reviews and one negative review. The editor requested major revisions and gave a three-month deadline for revisions.

In the second round, after spending two and a half months conducting additional experiments, the revised manuscript was resubmitted. Two reviewers accepted the manuscript, but unfortunately, the third reviewer went missing. The editor found a new reviewer who agreed that the revisions met the requirements and recommended publication, raising only three minor questions.

In the third round, it took around 10 days to receive the reviewer's feedback and wait for further instructions.

(0) 讚！ | 阿贾

Please translate the following paragraph into English: 1

(0) 讚！ | HZ848484