AGU Publications relies on our reviewers to help ensure the standards, quality, and significance of our papers, and timeliness of our review process. Peer-reviewed manuscripts are the cornerstone of advancing science and are increasingly important in numerous uses in society. Thank you for your support and help in advancing our science and serving society.
All reviewers are expected to uphold AGU's ethical guidelines and to disclose any conflicts of interest to the editors. Reviewers are expected to keep manuscripts confidential.
In general, the most helpful review is one which first provides an overall summary of the main contribution of the paper and its appropriateness for the journal and summarizes what major items should be addressed in revision. These can be explained and amplified in further comments or paragraphs. Minor suggestions or edits are best listed separately. Any issues that the editors should be aware of can be indicated separately in "remarks to the editors" and will remain confidential. If you prefer, you can upload a file with your review and/or an annotated manuscript. For further information, see this Eos feature article.
In addition to a written review, you will be asked several specific questions regarding the manuscript and its presentation (answers in drop-down selections). If you are reviewing a commentary, please see the description and instructions on how to write a commentary for an AGU journal. If you are reviewing any other manuscript types please answer these as best as you can.
Please recognize that final decisions on acceptance or rejection and the extent of revisions are made by the editors. Reviewers play a critical advisory role in that process. AGU will inform you of the final decision.
Please return your review on time. If you are unable to meet the agreed-upon deadline, contact the journal staff immediately so that the editors can determine the appropriate course of action. Extensions are granted at the discretion of the editors. Please submit your review online using the link provided.
Please help ensure that manuscripts comply with AGU’s Data Policy and follow best practices, including that data, data products, and code supporting the conclusions be available upon publication and that sufficient information be provided in the methods sections to allow readers to understand or reproduce the findings. Data should be in a domain repository if available; otherwise the data can be in a general repository such as Zenodo, Figshare or Dryad, or an institutional repository, or if necessary supporting information. In general, “data available from author” statements are not appropriate. Deposition should be for the usual refined data and data products that are archived in relevant repositories or in the discipline. A statement on data availability should be included in the acknowledgments. Report any concerns regarding data availability as part of your review.
Highlights: The journal’s editors recommend a number of papers with particularly interesting findings or methods, timeliness, or broader relevance for extra promotion. If you feel that the paper is particularly noteworthy, please indicate this in the appropriate section of the review form. In particular, AGU is now considering commentaries (ca. 1500 words and 1-2 figures) written by scientists to accompany key papers. These are intended to place the results and related issues into a broader context for the AGU audience and to point out future directions in the field. They will be published in the journal and highlighted to the community. If you feel the manuscript you are reviewing is such a piece, please indicate this in the review form. All such commentaries are invited by the editors.
When you log into GEMS, you will be taken to your home page. The manuscript you have agreed to review will be under “Reviewer Tasks” and will be marked with a red arrow.
Click on this link to access additional instructions, the details of the manuscript and files, and the Review form (click on “Review manuscript” link).
Please update your contact information and areas of expertise by selecting Modify Profile/Password, under General Tasks, at the bottom of your home page.
AGU will provide credit for your review to your ORCID profile with your permission. ORCID is unique identifier for researchers where you can list publications, reviews, and more. First, register for an ORCID and associate it with your GEMS profile, both of which can be done by updating your profile (link at bottom of your home page once you log into GEMS). After completing your review, you will receive an email asking for permission for AGU to update your ORCID record. We only indicate to ORCID the journal and year that you completed each review, not any other information on the paper.
AGU also recognizes reviewers throughout the year at meetings with awards and service subscriptions.