South China Fisheries Science adopts a three-step review process based on peer review (preliminary review by an editor, peer review by referees, and final review by the Editor-in-Chief). A double-blind review is used, so as to ensure the academic quality of the journal. The manuscript is processed in the following steps: 

1.   Manuscript received

• Once the manuscript has been registered, the author will receive a manuscript number. 

2.   Pre-review (within 1–2 weeks).

• The Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to the editor covering the relevant subject areas. She/he gets access to the entire manuscript. Then a plagiarism check is appliedn (Academic Misconduct Literature Detection System" Work: AMLC: https://check.cnki.net/amlc2/), and a report is available to the author if necessary.

• According to the content of the manuscript, the editor puts forward preliminary revision opinions or rejects the article. The judging criteria are: 1) Whether it is in line with the purpose and topic selection scope of this journal; 2) Whether there are new ideas; 3) Whether there are too many similar manuscripts and the contents are repeated; 4) The coincidence rate of academic misconduct detection is high (except for materials and methods, other parts should try not to have overlapping words); 5) Simple or obvious defects; 6) Poor writing, logical confusion and lack of readability. 

3.  Peer-review (within 2–4 weeks).

• The editor nominates at least two independent referees. As soon as a referee has agreed, she/he receives the manuscript without the names of the authors and their affiliations (double-blind peer-review process).

• Once at least two independent referee reports have been received, the editor read these reports and to make a decision. In addition to acceptance/rejection, the editor can request technical corrections (no further review), minor revisions (further review by editor only), as well as major revisions (further review by referees and editor).

• The editor informs the author of the manuscript about the decision and provides a link to the reports of the editor and the referees, which do not contain the names of the referees (double-blind peer-review process).

• The peer-review process of each manuscript is summarized in the online editorial support system, and Editor-in-Chief, editors, authors, and referees have access to parts that concern them. 

4.   Final-review (within 3 weeks)

• The editor in chief of the editorial department reviews the manuscript regularly, and finally decides whether to accept it based on the opinions of referees and the author's revision. If the revision does not meet the criteria of the journal, the author should revise again; If it needs to be reviewed by referees, it will be submitted for review again.