Announcements

On 19 November 2024, we had the privilege of visiting our former Editor-in-Chief and current Section Editor-in-Chief of Agronomy (ISSN: 2073-4395), Prof. Dr. Peter Langridge. Serving as Editor-in-Chief for over 12 years, Prof. Dr. Langridge expressed his gratitude for the support and dedication of the journal’s editorial team. During his tenure, he made an exceptional 437 decisions as an Editorial Board Member and Guest Editor, leaving a lasting impact on the journal’s development. We are deeply grateful for his invaluable contributions, which have significantly shaped the journal’s success and reputation. Reflecting on his experience, Prof. Dr. Langridge shared his thoughts on the journal’s evolution, scientific research, and the future of agronomy.

The following is a short interview with Prof. Dr. Peter Langridge:

1. Among your many professional roles, which do you find the most significant and fulfilling?
My work with Ph.D. students has been the most fulfilling aspect of my career. I have supervised about 70 students, many of whom have gone on to take up significant roles worldwide. The close, collaborative relationships we developed over 3–4 years were incredibly rewarding. I often feel like I have learnt as much from them as they have learnt from me. Even though I no longer have students since retiring as a professor, I still stay in touch with many of them. Those relationships are lifelong.

2. How do you maintain a balance between research commitments and personal life?
Balancing work and personal life isn’t always straightforward—it fluctuates. There are intense periods where research demands all your attention, followed by quieter times. Personally, I relax by spending time outdoors. I’m lucky to have a large garden with a vineyard, 200 fruit trees, and chickens. Gardening, building, or simply being outdoors helps me recharge. I’ve also learned the importance of setting realistic expectations and taking the time to recover after demanding phases.

3. Scientific research can be a source of considerable stress, affecting not only graduate students but also their mentors. What advice do you have for managing stress in scientific research?
I don’t find research itself stressful—it’s something I’ve always enjoyed. My advice is to approach every experiment with optimism, believing it will work. Of course, failures are inevitable, but they are also opportunities to learn. The key is to stay enthusiastic, even when things don’t go as planned. There is always another experiment to try or a different angle to explore. Staying calm and focused has always helped me navigate challenges.

4. Could you discuss individuals or experiences that have significantly influenced your research career?
I've had the privilege of working with many excellent individuals throughout my career. Many of my students were involved in crop breeding and genetics. A significant number of them were part-time breeders while also working with me. In their projects, they worked on both the theoretical aspects of breeding and the underlying principles, while simultaneously engaging in practical breeding.
Interacting with these students, who had real-world experience with practical issues, was immensely rewarding. They could describe the challenges they were tackling, and together, we would work on finding scientific solutions to address them. This hands-on approach has been invaluable.
I was fortunate to have an exceptional supervisor during my Ph.D., whose influence has had a lasting impact on me. Afterward, I had the opportunity to do a postdoc in Germany, where my supervisor was equally outstanding. He gave me the freedom to explore my own ideas but was always available for discussions. Every day, we would sit together for about an hour to talk about science and related topics, which greatly enriched my research experience.
When I moved to Adelaide after my postdoc, I had the chance to work with excellent mentors. I transitioned from theoretical biology to a more applied approach in the agriculture faculty. This shift provided me with my first direct exposure to the practical aspects of plant science. I vividly remember attending morning teas, where the wheat breeder would bring in a dead plant and ask, “What do you think happened to this plant?”. The pathologist would analyze the diseases present, and a lively discussion would unfold about the issues at hand. It was a fantastic environment where basic science and knowledge could be directly applied to solve real-world problems.

5. In your view, what are the essential components of a high-quality research paper? Is it primarily the result of groundbreaking research with substantial scientific merit, or does it hinge on well-conceived ideas and proficient writing?
There are different types of researchers out there. There are those who make breakthrough advances, which are major contributions to the field. However, these are relatively rare. Most publications do not necessarily have an outstanding component; it really depends on what you're trying to achieve. In applied areas, demonstrating a new application of a technology or tool can be incredibly valuable, especially if it has not been used in that way before.
I think we often underestimate the importance of incremental work and data collection. While these contributions may not lead to major publications, they still provide valuable information and material for others to work with.
The most exciting papers, in my view, are often the interpretive ones. These are the papers where researchers may not have used their own data but instead analyze and interpret existing data in new ways, offering fresh perspectives on how to view a topic.
When it comes to getting papers accepted by journals, it's a different issue. You need to consider what reviewers will be looking for. The paper needs to be clear, well-explained, and well-written. I've seen a huge difference between those who take the time to carefully wordsmith their papers—going through the process of making the language clear and precise. The clarity is important, but sometimes, if the writing is too stark, it becomes boring. There needs to be enough engagement to keep the reader interested, and the structure of the paper plays a big role in that.

6. Over the past 14 years, what notable transformations or advancements have occurred in the field of crop genetic breeding? What guidance would you offer to emerging scientists in this area?
It is always difficult to pinpoint exactly when things change, but it often feels like progress has accelerated in recent years, although change probably has always been happening at a relatively fast pace.
One of the biggest changes has been the shift in research priorities due to climate change. Food production is under immense pressure, and research is increasingly focused on addressing these challenges. Another significant development is the move from focusing solely on single commodities to understanding how crops fit into the broader agricultural systems—like crop rotations and multiple cropping.
Advances in genomics have also been transformative, with tools like genomic selection and gene editing starting to make a big impact. For new researchers, it’s an exciting but challenging time. The expectations are higher, and there are incredible tools and platforms available now, from advanced phenotyping systems to computational resources for data analysis. But with these opportunities come with the need to think differently.
For instance, instead of just improving the resilience of existing crops, we should ask if those crops are still suitable for certain areas. Maybe it’s time to explore alternatives better suited to the changing conditions. It’s about questioning the status quo and being bold enough to pursue new approaches.

7. What role do academic journals play in scientific communication?
It’s still our main mechanism for disseminating knowledge in science. If anything, it has become much more efficient now due to the advance of search engines. In the past, I would spend time each week in the library, going through resources like Current Contents, which contained tables of contents from various journals. I would go through them, request copies of papers, or even photocopy them myself. I had a large filing cabinet to store all the publications I’d photocopied, and when writing a paper, I’d have to go back to those files. Now, I don’t bother with any of that. I simply search online, find the papers, read them on the internet, and use them directly. This has been a huge change, and it’s made science much more accessible.
However, the increased accessibility of information also comes with its challenges. There is an overabundance of published material now, with so many journals proliferating that it’s become a problem. Researchers have to be more selective and smarter about which journals they choose to engage with.
I recently gave a talk to early career researchers, and one point I emphasized was the importance of understanding the literature. There’s a tendency to overlook older publications, and this can lead to problems. A lot of solid foundational science from the 1950s or 1960s is often ignored by younger researchers, who typically don’t go back that far in their literature searches. The issue is further compounded by the reliance on secondary sources, where older publications are cited, but often inaccurately. There have been several instances where a paper is cited, but upon checking, it’s clear that the citation is incorrect or misinterpreted.
Understanding the history of your field is crucial, even if it means going back many years. And many of these older papers may not be easily accessible anymore, which is another challenge.

8. What advice would you give to the next generation of agronomy researchers who may be considering publishing in Agronomy or other MDPI journals?
I was drawn to Agronomy because of its broad view of the field. Over time, there had been a separation between genetics and crop improvement on one side, and agronomy, which focused on the application and management of farming systems, on the other. When the Agronomy journal started, I was eager to see a publication that returned to the true definition of agronomy—encompassing the entire production system. This includes crop improvement, crop management, and how these aspects are integrated with environmental changes. I believe this remains a crucial focus, and one of the most important aspects of agronomy today.

From left to right: Dr. Amy Cham, Prof. Dr. Peter Langridge, Dr. Colin Wee