[PRE REVIEW]: ggPlantmap: an R package for the graphic mapping of plant images

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@leonardojo<!--end-author-handle-- (Leonardo Jo) Repository: https://github.com/leonardojo/ggPlantmap Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.0.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2642d62fd8fa1570556da2ba79923c9f"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2642d62fd8fa1570556da2ba79923c9f/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2642d62fd8fa1570556da2ba79923c9f/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2642d62fd8fa1570556da2ba79923c9f)

Author instructions

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

@leonardojo 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=0.07 s (227.4 files/s, 241750.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XML                              2              0              0          14966
Markdown                         6            200              0            747
TeX                              1             21              0            216
Rmd                              3            108            232            121
R                                3             26            248             98
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            16            356            484          16166
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1168

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

tidyHeatmap: an R package for modular heatmap production based on tidy principles Submitting author: @stemangiola Handling editor: @karthik (Retired) Reviewers: @rlbarter, @AliciaSchep Similarity score: 0.8626

cartography: Create and Integrate Maps in your R Workflow Submitting author: @rCarto Handling editor: @arfon (Active) Reviewers: @jankatins Similarity score: 0.8586

Visualizations with statistical details: The ggstatsplot approach Submitting author: @IndrajeetPatil Handling editor: @csoneson (Active) Reviewers: @njtierney, @kevinrue Similarity score: 0.8546

Vizumap: an R package for visualising uncertainty in spatial data Submitting author: @lydialucchesi Handling editor: @bstabler (Retired) Reviewers: @nuest, @GISerDaiShaoqing Similarity score: 0.8428

iheatmapr: Interactive complex heatmaps in R Submitting author: @AliciaSchep Handling editor: @arfon (Active) Reviewers: @arfon Similarity score: 0.8414

⚠️ 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 before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- None

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1371/journal.pone.0000718 may be a valid DOI for title: An “Electronic Fluorescent Pictograph” browser for exploring and analyzing large-scale biological data sets
- 10.32614/rj-2013-014 may be a valid DOI for title: ggmap: spatial visualization with ggplot2.
- 10.1101/268102 may be a valid DOI for title: Week-long imaging of cell divisions in the Arabidopsis root meristem
- 10.1186/s12870-015-0483-8 may be a valid DOI for title: High-resolution confocal imaging of wall ingrowth deposition in plant transfer cells: Semi-quantitative analysis of phloem parenchyma transfer cell development in leaf minor veins of Arabidopsis
- 10.1101/2020.09.05.284380 may be a valid DOI for title: A spatiotemporal molecular switch governs plant asymmetric cell division
- 10.1007/s10265-020-01174-3 may be a valid DOI for title: Aiming for the top: non-cell autonomous control of shoot stem cells in Arabidopsis
- 10.3389/fpls.2019.00206 may be a valid DOI for title: Lateral root primordium morphogenesis in angiosperms
- 10.1093/plphys/kiab478 may be a valid DOI for title: Single-cell genomics in plants: current state, future directions, and hurdles to overcome
- 10.1038/nmeth.2075 may be a valid DOI for title: Icy: an open bioimage informatics platform for extended reproducible research

INVALID DOIs

- None

[leonardojo]

Missing DOIs fixed

[leonardojo]

Potential reviewers: Mohamed S. Sarhan conradstack Devang Thakkar Vladimir Shitov arfonsmith jankatins njtierney

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@leonardojo thanks for this submission. I am the AEiC on this track an here to help process initial steps. I just reviewed the above software report and you software repository. Given that this is an R-package, I am assuming the main functionality, and your contribution up for review here, is contained in the 98 lines of R? Can you please confirm this.

[leonardojo]

@leonardojo thanks for this submission. I am the AEiC on this track an here to help process initial steps. I just reviewed the above software report and you software repository. Given that this is an R-package, I am assuming the main functionality, and your contribution up for review here, is contained in the 98 lines of R? Can you please confirm this.

Yes, But also the 16 pre-loaded sets of tables/maps that are included in the package. Best,

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@leonardojo thanks for the clarification. Although the tables/maps are important, for JOSS there needs to be a significant core code functionality that is being presented. Given the small size of this project, e.g. in terms of lines of code and functionality contained in it, it is unfortunately not deemed in scope for JOSS. For more on our scope criteria we refer to: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#substantial-scholarly-effort

We will now proceed to reject this submission as out of scope.

Note that although this work is out of scope, this does not mean the work is of a poor quality, or is not useful. The above only relates to scope and the magnitude of the project at present (in terms of software capabilities).

We do hope you will consider JOSS for any future (re)submission, that are of a more substantial nature.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.