1. Government policies attempting to slow the spread of COVID‐19 have reduced access to research laboratories and shifted many scholars to working from home. These disruptions will likely influence submissions to scholarly journals, and affect the time available for editors and reviewers to participate in peer review.
2. In this editorial we examine how journal submissions, and editorial and peer review processes, have been influenced by the pandemic at six journals published by the British Ecological Society (BES).
3. We find no evidence of a change in the geographic pattern of submissions from across the globe. We also find no evidence that submission of manuscripts by women has been more affected by pandemic disruptions than have submissions by men—the proportion of papers authored by women during the COVID period of 2020 has not changed relative to the same period in 2019.
4. Editors handled papers just as quickly, and reviewers have agreed to review just as often, during the pandemic compared to pre‐pandemic. The one notable change in peer review during the pandemic is that reviewers replied more quickly to emails inviting them to review (albeit only 4% sooner), and those who agreed to review returned their reviews more quickly (17% sooner), during the pandemic.
5. We thus find no evidence at these six ecology journals that submissions and peer review processes have been negatively impacted by the pandemic. Also, contrary to analyses in other disciplines, we do not find evidence that there have been disproportionate impacts of the pandemic on female authors and reviewers.

中文翻译：

---

全球COVID-19大流行对六种生态学期刊的论文投稿以及编辑和审稿人表现的影响

1. 试图减缓COVID-19传播的政府政策减少了进入研究实验室的机会，并使许多学者转向在家工作。这些中断可能会影响向学术期刊的投稿，并影响编辑和审稿人参与同行审阅的时间。
2. 在这篇社论中，我们研究了英国生态学会（BES）出版的六种期刊对大流行的影响如何影响期刊的投稿以及社论和同行评审过程。
3. 我们发现没有证据表明来自全球的提交内容的地理格局发生了变化。我们还没有发现证据表明，与男性相比，女性提交稿件受到大流行干扰的影响更大，与2020年同期相比，女性在2020年COVID期间撰写论文的比例没有变化。
4. 与大流行前相比，大流行期间，编辑人员处理论文的速度一样快，而审稿人也同意进行同样频繁的审稿。大流行期间同行评审的一个显着变化是，审稿者对邀请他们进行审阅的电子邮件的回复速度更快（虽然只有4％），而同意审阅的人在大流行期间回复得更快（17％）。 。
5. 因此，我们在这六种生态期刊中没有发现证据表明提交的文件和同行评审过程已受到大流行的负面影响。而且，与其他学科的分析相反，我们没有发现证据表明该流行病对女性作者和评论者有不成比例的影响。