[PRE REVIEW]: growR: R Implementation of the Vegetation Model ModVege

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @kuadrat (Kevin Kramer)
Repository: https://github.com/kuadrat/growR
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss
Version: v1.2.0
Editor: @mikemahoney218
Reviewers: @shubhamjain15, @RobLBaker
Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/bd4b3a207a8d4de1dc784dba702e38fc"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/bd4b3a207a8d4de1dc784dba702e38fc/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/bd4b3a207a8d4de1dc784dba702e38fc/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/bd4b3a207a8d4de1dc784dba702e38fc)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @kuadrat. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@kuadrat if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.05 s (1115.3 files/s, 164699.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R                               31            326           2459           2521
TeX                              2             36              0            488
SVG                              2              2              2            433
Markdown                         4            103              0            361
YAML                             5             21              8            204
Rmd                              8            151            497             67
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            52            639           2966           4074
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 898

[editorialbot]

Failed to discover a Statement of need section in paper

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s10980-020-00980-3 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1308149110 is OK
- 10.1007/s10980-020-00980-3 is OK
- 10.1006/anbo.1997.0430 is OK
- 10.1017/S0021859600067290 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1365-2494.2006.00515.x is OK
- 10.1016/j.eja.2018.06.010 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100875 is OK
- 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.12.008 is OK
- 10.1016/j.eja.2021.126306 is OK
- 10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.05.017 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.10.052 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1995.tb03392.x is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2019.108925 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.27867 is OK
- 10.1016/S0308-521X(97)00023-1 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.11.023 is OK
- 10.1016/j.agee.2011.07.001 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- 10.1017/9781009325844.007.714 is INVALID

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

greta: simple and scalable statistical modelling in R
Submitting author: @goldingn
Handling editor: @terrytangyuan (Retired)
Reviewers: @lionel68, @joethorley, @lionel68
Similarity score: 0.8284

G³M-f a global gradient-based groundwater modelling framwork
Submitting author: @rreinecke
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @wkearn
Similarity score: 0.8227

villager: A framework for designing and executing agent-based models in R
Submitting author: @thomasthelen
Handling editor: @marcosvital (Active)
Reviewers: @chrisaberson, @brunomontezano, @thodson-usgs
Similarity score: 0.8201

pyveg: A Python package for analysing the time evolution of patterned vegetation using Google Earth Engine
Submitting author: @samvanstroud
Handling editor: @usethedata (Retired)
Reviewers: @arbennett, @usethedata
Similarity score: 0.8176

virtualNicheR: generating virtual fundamental and realised niches for use in virtual ecology experiments
Submitting author: @tretherington
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @ViniciusBRodrigues, @lsw5077
Similarity score: 0.8174

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[kthyng]

Hi @kuadrat and thanks for your submission! I'll add it to our waitlist, but in the meantime please check:

• you have two license files in your repo, please keep only one and and OSI-approved license.
• Add a statement of need section to your paper
• suggest 5 reviewers from our database or your extended but not conflicting network without actually pinging them with "@"

[kuadrat]

Hi @kthyng, happy New Year and thanks for taking up my submission!

Regarding the points you mention:

• The existence of two license files is a consequence of different expectations by github and CRAN. The issue is discussed, for example on stackoverflow. This seems to be a common problem for submissions to JOSS, see e.g. JOSS review jessecambon/tidygeocoder#128 and 2x licence files kadyb/rgugik#61. In those cases the conclusion was that nothing could be done about it...
• The first section is called Summary and Statement of Need, would that check the box for containing a statement of need?. Otherwise, I am happy to rename it to just Statement of Need.
• Potential reviewers just based on their areas of expertise as stated in the JOSS reviewer database: VEZY, albhasan, jmp75, shubhamjain15, kanishkan91

[kthyng]

We still don't have a relevant editor available, but we are expecting to on-board some new editors in the next few weeks so I expect this submission to be taking up by one of them.

[kuadrat]

We still don't have a relevant editor available, but we are expecting to on-board some new editors in the next few weeks so I expect this submission to be taking up by one of them.

Thanks for the update!

[kthyng]

@mikemahoney218 would you care to edit this submission?

[kthyng]

@editorialbot invite @mikemahoney218 as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[mikemahoney218]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @mikemahoney218 is now the editor

[mikemahoney218]

Happy to take this one on! It's about 4PM on a Friday in my time zone, so rather than hope people are checking their notifications over the weekend, I've scheduled emails to a few potential reviewers to go out on Monday morning. I'll follow up once I've found folks to review!

(Editing to add that the first set of requests went out this morning)

[mikemahoney218]

@editorialbot add @shubhamjain15 as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@shubhamjain15 added to the reviewers list!

[mikemahoney218]

@editorialbot add @RobLBaker as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@RobLBaker added to the reviewers list!

[mikemahoney218]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6260.