Congratulations to Professor Zhimin Xu of Louisiana State University, the winner of the 2020 Manfred Kroger Outstanding Reviewer Award for IFT's Scientific Journals. Some of the many accolades that can be said for Professor Xu's contributions are that he has reviewed 61 manuscripts over the past 15 years, which reflects agreeing to 98% of our reviewer requests. I asked Professor Xu several questions about being a reviewer, and here are his answers:

What would you tell a young scientist about the rewards of being a reviewer?

Xu : Basically, the rewards of being a reviewer are having an opportunity to learn what researchers of other research groups are working on and how good the research quality and capability of your peers are.

Can you briefly share your overall process in reviewing a manuscript?

Xu : First, I would judge the potential significance and novelty of the reported study to that research area. Then, I would carefully go through the experimental design because it involves in the validation of their results. The results explanation and discussion of a manuscript are also important to the assessment for its quality and contribution to the research field.

You have a stunning record of agreeing to 98% of the reviewer requests you receive. What motivates that level of dedication, and how do you fit it into an already busy schedule?

Xu : I just try my best to work with Editors for improving the quality of research articles published in JFS [Journal of Food Science ]. Thus, more valuable and reliable information in the latest food research area can be shared by food scientists and the general public.

Zhimin Xu

Professor Xu's comments perfectly reflect the duties, rewards, and benefits of being a reviewer. Establishing the “significance and novelty” is the essential gatekeeping function of reviewers. Likewise, once a reviewer is convinced the manuscript is addressing an appropriate topic, the next step is to determine if the experimental design properly addresses the hypothesis or objective raised in the introduction. Finally, a fair and constructive review reveals ways to make a manuscript better, thus “improving the quality of research articles published in JFS .”

In 2019, we sent out 10,028 reviewer requests for the Journal of Food Science . About a third of those resulted in submitted reviews. With a goal of three reviews per manuscript, that means that editors on average send out nine reviewer requests per manuscript. Unfortunately, that does not tell the whole story because reviewer requests can exceed twenty and fail to obtain three reviewers, and reviews can be late or inappropriate.

Xu's 2020 Manfred Kroger Outstanding Reviewer Award

When I read Dr. Xu's comments about being a reviewer it became apparent why he is our 2020 winner of the Manfred Kroger Outstanding Reviewer Award. He sees reviewing as benefiting his research knowledge and contributing to the science of food. We need more reviewers like Professor Xu……how about you?

Sincerely,

E. Allen Foegeding, Ph.D.

Editor in Chief,

IFT Scientific Journals

恭喜路易斯安那州立大学的徐志敏教授，他获得了2020年IFT科学期刊的Manfred Kroger杰出审稿人奖。可以说，徐教授的贡献获得了许多赞誉，其中包括他在过去15年中审阅了61篇手稿，这反映了我们对98％审稿人的要求表示同意。我问过徐教授几个关于复审的问题，以下是他的回答：

您会如何告诉年轻科学家成为审稿人的好处？

徐：基本上，成为审稿人的好处是有机会了解其他研究小组的研究人员正在从事什么工作，以及同行的研究质量和能力如何。

Ç的请您简要分享您的审查手稿整个过程？

徐：首先，我要判断所报告的研究对该领域的潜在意义和新颖性。然后，我将仔细地进行实验设计，因为它涉及对结果的验证。稿件的结果解释和讨论对于评估稿件的质量和对研究领域的贡献也很重要。

您有令人赞叹的记录，同意您收到的98％审阅者的请求。是什么激发了这种奉献精神的水平，您如何使其适应已经很繁忙的日程安排？

徐：我只是尽力与编辑合作，以提高发表在《食品科学杂志》上的研究文章的质量。因此，食品科学家和公众可以共享最新食品研究领域中更有价值，更可靠的信息。

徐志敏

徐教授的评论完全反映了作为审稿人的职责，回报和利益。建立“重要性和新颖性”是审稿人的基本管理职能。同样，一旦审稿人确信稿件正在解决适当的主题，下一步就是确定实验设计是否正确解决了引言中提出的假设或目标。最后，公正而建设性的评审揭示了使稿件更好的方法，从而“提高了JFS发表的研究论文的质量”。

2019年，我们对《食品科学杂志》发出了10,028条审稿人请求。其中约三分之一导致提交了评论。每个稿件的目标是三个审阅，这意味着编辑者平均每个稿件发出九个审稿人请求。不幸的是，这并不能说明全部情况，因为审阅者的请求可能超过二十，并且无法获得三名审阅者，并且审阅可能会延迟或不适当。

Xu的2020年Manfred Kroger杰出审稿人奖

当我阅读徐博士关于成为审稿人的评论时，很明显他为什么成为我们2020年曼弗雷德·克罗格杰出审稿人奖的获得者。他认为复习有益于他的研究知识并为食品科学做出贡献。我们需要更多的评论员，例如徐教授……您呢？

真诚的

E. Allen Foegeding博士

主编辑，

IFT科学期刊