向峥嵘的博客分享 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/u/xiangzr1969 南京理工大学 研究领域:非线性系统,鲁棒控制,混杂系统

博文

SCI投稿常用英语

已有 49549 次阅读 2008-5-12 20:51 |个人分类: 学习论坛|系统分类:科研笔记| 论文, SCI, 投稿

摘自:http://forum.e2002.com/thread-187286-1-7.html

一、投稿信
1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML:
I am sending a manuscript entitled “” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - .
Yours sincerely

2. Dear Dr. A:
Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers.

3. Dear Dr. A:
Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “” by sb. All authors have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.

We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers.

二、询问有无收到稿件
Dear Editors,

We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.

三、询问论文审查回音
Dear Editors,
It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.

四、关于论文的总体审查意见
1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest. A few minor revision are list below.
2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below.
3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as –
4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.
5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of – because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - .
6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory.
7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.
8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined.
9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays.
10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used?

五、给编辑的回信
1. In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that –
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.
2. I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.
3. Thank you for your letter of – and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “”. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval.
4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed.
5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.
6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript
7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.
8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.
9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.
10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.
11. I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.
12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available.
13. We prefer to retain the use of Table 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.
14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.
15. The running title has been changed to “”.
16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.
17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.
18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2).
19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.
20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.
21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:
22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.
23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication.
24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper.
25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees.
2006-10-30 16:02

近几个月来,有三篇文章被SCI源期刊接受发表,虽然心里清楚自己的实际水平不咋地,但还是比较高兴的,总结一下过程供大家参考。说的不对的地方望大家拍砖。觉得有帮助的同学就顶一下。

首先,当然是要把文章写出来,这里要注意的是一定要写的规范、流畅、条理清晰,结果的好坏固然是最重要的,但一定要在意写作的水平。

下面是发表的过程
1. 上传或写信或发E-mail投递

Dear Prof. xxx(Editor):

Attached(写信就用Enclosed) please find the latex(或者PDF) version of my paper entitled "xxx" with the kind request to consider it for publication in the journal xxx.

The authors claim that none of the material in the paper has been published or is under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Should you receive the paper, please send me a e-mail to confirm receipt
of it.

Thanks a lot in advance!

Sincerely, yours

xxx
地址

稍加修改就可以作为一个上传时用的cover letter.

2. 收到中期决定
一般情况下,收到编辑部的来信,让作者根据审稿人的意见修改,并且在意见中看到审稿人推荐盖文章发表,就成功了一大半。以我收到的信为例:

Dear Mr. xxx,

Your manuscript, referenced above, has now been reviewed and the reviewer(s) have made suggestions which the Editor feels would improve your manuscript.

The Editor encourages you to consider these comments and make an appropriate revision of your manuscript. The reviewer(s)' comments are below.

Please submit your revision online within 4 weeks by logging onto the Elsevier Editorial System for the Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications:
http://ees.elsevier.com/xxx
The manuscript is now listed under "Submissions Needing Revisions." Click "Revise" when you are ready to submit your revision.

Please include a cover letter that addresses the issues raised in the below comments, point by point. You should also include a suitable rebuttal to any specific request for change that has not been made.

Thank you, and we look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

With kind regards,

xxx
Associate Editor

3. 修改后再次上传
我修改后上传,coverletter如下:

Ms. No.: xxx
Title: xxx
Corresponding Author: xxx
Authors: xxx

Dear Editor:

My manuscript, referenced above, has been revised according to the reviewer(s)’comments.

I list the modifications as follows:

(1)...
(2)...
(3)...

We would like to thank the reviewer(s) for introducing the above literature to us. This is very helpful to our future study.

If there are other errors or further requests, please contact me by e-mail.

Sincerely, yours
xxx
地址

4. 收到最终决定
下面是我收到一例:

Ms. No.: xxx
Title: xxx
Corresponding Author: xxx
Authors: xxx

Dear Mr. xxx,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript referenced above has been accepted for publication in the Journal xxx.

Many thanks for submitting your fine paper to the xxx. We look forward to receiving additional papers from you in the future.

With kind regards,

xxx
Associate Editor

5. 收到版权转让声明以及抽印本订货单.
这封信比较长,不贴了,主要就是让你填好版权转让声明,因为已经赠送好多抽印本,所以不必再多订了,而且抽印本也是很贵的。接着要做的就是:

6. 填好版权转让声明、扫描后发送,信如下:

Our reference: xxx
Editorial reference: xxx
Title: xxx
To be published in: xxx
  
Dear xxx:

Attached please find the scanned copy of the signed TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT
AGREEMENT of xxx. If there are other requests, please contact me by e-mail.   

I wonder when I can receive the proofs of xxx for correction.(问一句校样何时能收到)
Should you receive this letter, please send  me an e-mail to confirm receipt of my signed TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AGREEMENT.

Many thanks in advance!

Sincerely, yours

xxx
地址

7. 收到校样及Author Query

8. 认真校对、认真填写Author Query后写信:

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your careful work. The proof of the article is wonderful.

But because of my carelessness, there are some inaccuracies in the proof of the article and I list them as follows. Please correct them before publication.

(1)...
(2)...
(3)...


In addition, attached please find the scanned Author Query Form which has been filled in carefully.

Should you receive this letter, please send me an e-mail to confirm receipt of it.

Many thanks in advance!

Kind regards,

xxx
地址

9. 耐心等待出版

10. 看到文章挂到网上,得意中

11. 还得继续写文章,痛苦并没有结束。。。 写好后重复第一条

12. 如此循环往复...

 

:《英文论文写作体会http://www.lunwenchina.net.cn/xiezuo/yyxz/6622887615436.html

本人近日侥幸在某SCI索引的外刊发表一篇论文,想在这里浅谈一下发外文的体会,供学弟、学妹们参考。我觉得发外文时主要注意以下几点:
1. 论文中必须至少有一个创新点。创新点或是开创性的工作,或是对原有工作的改进,或是提出一种新方法。老外对公式不是很看重,主要看你是否有创新。
2. 在外刊上发过文章的同学都知道,Introduction部分是最难写的,我认为在这部分中不但要提及题目的意义,别人的研究成果,更重要的是要指出你这篇论文的贡献,以吸引审
稿人的眼球。
3. 标题也很重要,即要新颖又要体现你的论文的主要工作及采用的方法
4. 实验素材要丰富,以数据说话,让人感觉你作了许多工作。
5. 要直接用英文写,学会用英语语言思考问题,不要先写成汉语再翻成英语,这样写出来的东西总有点中国英语的味道,让审稿人看起来不舒服。
6. 平时多看一些牛刊的论文,摘抄一个常用的语句及段落,如开场白、题目的意义、章节安排、语气转折等,活学活用。这样写出来的文章看起来就很漂亮了。
7. 对审稿人提出的修改意见或建议一定要认真对待,尽量满足他们的要求,如你认为某些意见或建议不妥,要在回信中加以阐述。
8. 认真研究所发期刊的参考文献的引用格式。我的一位师兄就是因为这点直接被拒了。

怎样写英文投稿信?

 A cover letter is the one you write to the editorial board of the journals when you submit your manuscript.

One cover letter generally should include the following parts:

(1)The correspondence information of the correspondent;

(2)The title of the manuscript, the numbers of tables, figures, charts, plates and so on;

(3)The statement that this manucript has never been partly or wholely published in or submitted to any other journals;

(4)The statement that all authors in the manuscript have agreed to submit it to this journal and it's better to have each one's signature;

(5)The statement that the research in the manuscript has been conducted under the guidance of international ethical standards if the research uses animals as experimental materials;

(7)Suggested reviewers you think that are appropriate for this manuscript;

(8)The statement on the inapropriate reviewers for this manuscript, and it's better to state the reasons in concise words;

(9)Some journals require the authors to briefly introduce his research purposes, methods and results.

The following is one cover letter I wrote with a plate given by the two professors.

 Zhang San, Ph D

Environment and Architecture School,

Sichuan University

Mozhiqiao, Ring One Road, Chengdu, Sichuan

The People’s Republic of China

Zip code: 610088

E-mail: abc@yahoo.com.cn

Dear Dr. Richard

I enclose a manuscript entitled The Preparation of the Monokaryon Protoplast and its Regenration in Oyster Mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus), which I submit for possible publication in the Jounal of Biosource Technology. All of the authors agree to the submission of this paper.

The text includes 20 pages, 3 tables, and 2 figures prepared using Microsoft Word Processing 2003 according to the journal's Instructions to Authors.  We have provided all required supporting documentation.

We respectfully submit that the following individuals would be suitable peer reviewers based on their expertise in the field:

Li Yu, Microbiological Research Institute, Chinese Acadmey of Agricutlureal Sciences. E-mail: li_yu@yahoo.cn

Zhang Jun, Resources and Environmental Protection School, Sichuan Agricultural University. E-mail: zhangjun@yahoo.cn

Chen Wei,  School of Horticulture, China Agricultural University. E-mail: chenwei@yahoo.cn

In recent years, our research group has had some conflicts with Li Haha and Wang Chuachua in Sichuan Institute of Microbiology in project application. We request that these individuals not be consulted.

We thank you for considering this work and look forward to your response.  Please direct all correspondence about this manuscript to me (or Dr. Zhang San, e-amil: Zhangsan@yahoo.cn).

Sincerely

Zhang Shan

e-mail: zhangsan@yahoo.com.cn

The following are all the authors in this paper and their signature.

Zhang San   XXX

Li   Si       XXX

Wang Wu  XXX

Yang Yu    XXX

 

More examples about how to write a cover letter!


COVER LETTER(投稿信)实用指南

 

来源于:http://www.sciencenet.cn/blog/user_content.aspx?id=9079

 

1、 什么是cover letter

指的是投稿信

2cover letter的内容主要包括那些?

应该简述所投稿件的核心内容、主要发现和意义,拟投期刊,对稿件处理有无特殊要求等(如“not to review list)。另外,请附上主要作者的中文姓名、通讯地址、电话、传真和e-mail地址。此外有的杂志要求推荐几位审稿人及其联系方式。以及谁已经阅读过该文(当然是牛人)。

有的杂志要求作者写明你没有一搞多投,此外临床实验要求写明符合伦理学要求等。

3、 如何写cover letter

各个杂志的具体要求是不一样的,在杂志的guide for authors一般会有要求。如果没有具体的要求,大家可按照通用要求处理。

4、常用模板:

1

Cover letter

Dear Mr. **

1. The work described has not been submitted elsewhere for publication, in whole or in part, and all the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed.

2. I have read and have abided by the statement of ethical standards for manuscripts submitted to Neuroscience.

kind regards.

Your sincerely,

通讯作者

2

Dear Dr. 主编name:

We submit our manuscript entitled " 文章title" to 杂志名for publication.

接着简单介绍你文章的主要创新点和意义,不易过多,但要突出新意和关键点。

All authors have seen the manuscript and approved to submit to your journal.

Thank you very much for your attention and consideration.

Sincerely yours,

通讯作者

3

Dear Dr. 主编name:

We submit our manuscript entitled " 文章title" to 杂志名for publication.

接着简单介绍你文章的主要创新点和意义,不易过多,但要突出新意和关键点。

All authors have seen the manuscript and approved to submit to your journal.

Thank you very much for your attention and consideration.

Sincerely yours,

通讯作者

4Dr. ***

Editor-in-Chief, ***

(add address) January 22, 2003

Dear Dr. **,

Enclosed herewith please find 3 copies of a MS by: ‘***. *** and ***’ entitled: “**********”, which we would like to submit for publication in the ‘******'.

Looking forward to your decision,

With kind personal regards,

Sincerely yours,

*****

Professor of ***

5

Dear Prof. Gil:

This is a manuscript by**and **entitled “.......”. It is submitted to be considered for publication as a “...” in your journal. This paper is new. Neither the entire paper nor any part of its content has been published or has been accepted elsewhere. It is not being submitted to any other journal.

We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readers of your journal as it ........

Correspondence should be addressed to **at the following address, phone and fax number, and email address:

...

Thanks very much for your attention to our paper.

Sincerely yours,

**

6

Date: Sep 15, 2003

Dear Editors:

On behalf of my co-authors, I am submitting the enclosed material “ TITLE ” for possible publication in JOURNAL.

We certify that we have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the appropriateness of the experimental design and method, and the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data.

We have reviewed the final version of the manuscript and approve it for publication. To the best of our knowledge and belief, this manuscript has not been published in whole or in part nor is it being considered for publication elsewhere.

Best Regards.

Yours Sincerely,

NAME,ADRESS,EMAIL,FAX

7

Dear Dr Regino Perez-Polo

Enclosed are a manuscript by su jian, yang kun, chen zhihuaSu jian titledHypothermia after Acute Ischemic Stroke

”. It is submitted to be considered for publication as areview" in your journalThis paper is~?Neither the entire paper nor any part of its content has been published or has been accepted elsewhere It is not being submitted to any other journal

We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readers of your journal.

Correspondence and phone calls about the paper should be directed to Su jian at the following addressphone and fax numberand e-mail address

Su jian

Institute:,

Adress:

Tel

Fax:

E-mail

Thanks very much for your attention to our paper

Sincerely yours

Su jian

8

Dear Editor,

We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled "GDNF Acutely Modulates Neuronal Excitability and A-type Potassium Channels in Midbrain Dopaminergic Neurons", which we wish to be considered for publication in Nature Neuroscience.

GDNF has long been thought to be a potent neurotrophic factor for the survival of midbrain dopaminergic neurons, which are degenerated in Parkinson’s disease. In this paper, we report an unexpected, acute effect of GDNF on A-type potassium channels, leading to a potentiation of neuronal excitability, in the dopaminergic neurons in culture as well as in adult brain slices. Further, we show that GDNF regulates the K+ channels through a mechanism that involves activation of MAP kinase. Thus, this study has revealed, for the first time, an acute modulation of ion channels by GDNF. Our findings challenge the classic view of GDNF as a long-term survival factor for midbrain dopaminergic neurons, and suggest that the normal function of GDNF is to regulate neuronal excitability, and consequently dopamine release. These results may also have implications in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease.

Due to a direct competition and conflict of interest, we request that Drs. XXX of Harvard Univ., and YY of Yale Univ. not be considered as reviewers. With thanks for your consideration, I am

Sincerely yours,

9

Dear **.

We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled " *** ", which we wish to be considered for publication in **journal.

We believe that two aspects of this manuscript will make it interesting to general readers of **journal. First, ***. Second, ***. Further, ***.

Thank you very much your considering our manuscript for potential publication. I'm looking forward to hearing from you soon.

Best wishes.

10

To: SOLA Chief Editor

Division of Geoenvironmental Sciences

University of Tsukuba

Tsukuba 305-8572, JAPAN

E-Mail: sola@sakura.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp

Dear Sirs,

I am sending herewith a copy of the manuscript, which I would like to submit to SOLA, the Electronic Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan.

The paper is entitled:

Energy Spectrum Proportional to the Squared Phase Speed of

Rossby Modes in the General Circulation of the Atmosphere

by H. L. Tanaka, Yasushi Watarai, and Takahiro Kanda.

Copy of the Abstract:

In this study, energy spectrum of the large-scale atmospheric motions is examined in the framework of the 3D normal mode decomposition. The horizontal scale of disturbance is measured by the phase speed of a Rossby mode c. According to the analysis result for the barotropic component of the atmosphere, we obtain a characteristic energy spectrum with distinct slopes for the turbulence and wave regimes separated by the spherical Rhines speed. In order to explain the observational finding that the energy spectrum is proportional to c^2, we put forward a hypothesis based on the criterion of Rossby wave breaking such that the local meridional gradient of potential vorticity becomes negative, dq/dy < 0, somewhere in the domain. With a constant m describing a total mass of the atmosphere for unit area, we have shown that the barotropic energy spectrum of the general circulation E can be represented as E=mc^2.

Corresponding Author:

Dr. Hiroshi L. Tanaka

Division of Geoenvironmental Sciences

University of Tsukuba

Tsukuba 305-8572, JAPAN

Tel: +81-29-853-4502

Fax: +81-29-853-6879

E-Mail: tanaka@sakura.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp

I hereby certify that this paper consists of original, unpublished work which is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Desired Editors in Charge:

Kimoto, Masahide University of Tokyo

Mak, Mankin University of Illinois

Five Potential Reviewers:

Name-1, e-mail address-1

Name-2, e-mail address-2

Name-3, e-mail address-3

Name-4, e-mail address-4

Name-5, e-mail address-5

The original manuscript and figures will be transferred, following the instruction by the Editorial Committee when the paper is accepted. I hope your favorable consideration for publication to SOLA.

Sincerely,

Hiroshi L. Tanaka

Attachment: PDF file of the manuscript.

看看我是如何回答审稿人的修改意见

Re: PAT-09-234 revised

The manuscript PAT-09-234 has been carefully revised and some new data were added in the revised text (please see Table 2), and the major revisions were marked in red. We appreciate the detailed and useful comments and suggestions from you and referees. The point-by-point answers to the comments and suggestions were listed as below.

 

Referee #1:

Q1. In Fig 1, “50?” should be “50oC”.

Answer: We accept the referee’s suggestion, this error has been corrected in the revised manuscript.

 

Q2. Page 4, line 54: “Then the mixture was degassed to remove entrapped air at 150oC in a vacuum oven for 2h.......”. Fig 4 indicated that the gel time of 30%HBPSIEP/BCE at 160 oC is about 100min. if the resin has been cured in degassing process?

Answer: These errors have been corrected and the related paragraph has been rewritten in the revised manuscript.

 

Q3. In Fig 2, the units for wavenumber should be shown in the diagram.

Answer: We accept the referee’s suggestion, the units for wavenumber have been labelled in the plot, please see the X-axis in Figure 1 in the revised manuscript.

 

Q4. Page 11, line 40: “More interesting, it has been proved that if a material has higher char yield and lower Tmax, then the material will have better flame retardancy.” The author should provide the proof that Higher char yield indicate better flame retardancy.

Answer: The suggestion has been taken seriously and these sentences have been deleted from the revised manuscript due to the deficiency of related proof.

 

 

Referee #2:

Q1. Authors reported negatively charged membrane but they did not studied membrane conductivity, which is essential property to asses, the suitability of charged membrane.

Answer: As the referee’s comment pointed out, membrane conductivity is really the essential property to evaluate the suitability of charged membrane, especially for their applications in fuel cells. However, for their applications in environmental field, such as the removal of heavy metal ions from the aqueous solution, membrane conductivity seems to be less important. This is because in this case we mainly concern the ion-exchange capacity rather than the proton conductivity. Consequently, we think it is not necessary to highlight membrane conductivity of the prepared negatively charged hybrid membranes and these data were not reported in this manuscript.

 

Q2. Extremely low ion-exchange capacities of developed membranes (0.2-0.3 mmol g-1) jeopardize their applications.

   Answer: As the referee’s comment pointed out, the ion-exchange capacities (IECs) of the prepared membranes were relatively lower. Thus will influence their applications as adsorbent for the removal of heavy metal ions from water. This is the reason why the adsorption behaviors for removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions using these hybrid membranes were not reported in this study.

For their applications in industry especially in environmental field, further work is thus required to optimize the membrane preparation process so as to highly elevate the IEC values of these hybrid membranes. We believe this problem will be solved with the further improvement on membrane properties and optimization of operational parameters. When the membrane properties are improved and ideal IECs are obtained, their adsorption behaviors for removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions will be further investigated, which will be our future job. This explain has been added in the revised manuscript, please see lines 5-14 on page 13.

 

Q3. A membrane should have good mechanical stability for its applications. But author failed to include any information on the mechanical stability of the membrane.

Answer: As the referee’s comment pointed out, good mechanical stability of a membrane can conduce to its application especially for its use in industrial separation by pressure. Geneally speaking, organic membrane has lower mechanical strength and stability, it can not meet the need of separation in industry. Consequently, hybridization technique is used to increase the membrane’s mechanical and stability. Nonetheless, for hybrid membranes potentially used in non-pressure operating condition, thermal stability may be more attractive in that they expects to be used in higher temperature and strongly oxidizing circumstances for industrial applications (as stated in the abstract). In our case, the prepared membranes expect to be used in environmental field, not be used to separate species by pressure, thus we mainly concern their thermal stability rather than their mechanical strength. Due to these reasons, the thermal stability of the prepared membranes was highlighted and the mechanical stability of the membrane was not reported in this manuscript.

 

Q4. Author should also include proposed applications for the reported membranes. It would have been better that author should complete their investigation for adsorption behaviors for removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions using reported membranes and report the findings also. This would have been attractive feature of the manuscript.

Answer: This comment was highly appreciated. The explain was given in question 2, please see the answer to question 2 and the lines 5-14 on page 13 in the revised text. The main purpose of this manuscript is to develop new preparation technique of negatively charged hybrid membranes. As the referee’s comment suggested,when the membrane properties are greatly improved, their applications in industry will be further investigated.

 

 

Finally, we appreciate very much for your time in editing our manuscript and the referees for their valuable suggestions and comments. I am looking forward to hearing from your final decision when it is made.

虽然有一些实验没有补充,但是文章还是发表了。

本文引用地址:http://www.sciencenet.cn/blog/user_content.aspx?id=252831

 

看看我是如何回答审稿人的修改意见

Re: PAT-09-234 revised

The manuscript PAT-09-234 has been carefully revised and some new data were added in the revised text (please see Table 2), and the major revisions were marked in red. We appreciate the detailed and useful comments and suggestions from you and referees. The point-by-point answers to the comments and suggestions were listed as below.

 

Referee #1:

Q1. In Fig 1, “50?” should be “50oC”.

Answer: We accept the referee’s suggestion, this error has been corrected in the revised manuscript.

 

Q2. Page 4, line 54: “Then the mixture was degassed to remove entrapped air at 150oC in a vacuum oven for 2h.......”. Fig 4 indicated that the gel time of 30%HBPSIEP/BCE at 160 oC is about 100min. if the resin has been cured in degassing process?

Answer: These errors have been corrected and the related paragraph has been rewritten in the revised manuscript.

 

Q3. In Fig 2, the units for wavenumber should be shown in the diagram.

Answer: We accept the referee’s suggestion, the units for wavenumber have been labelled in the plot, please see the X-axis in Figure 1 in the revised manuscript.

 

Q4. Page 11, line 40: “More interesting, it has been proved that if a material has higher char yield and lower Tmax, then the material will have better flame retardancy.” The author should provide the proof that Higher char yield indicate better flame retardancy.

Answer: The suggestion has been taken seriously and these sentences have been deleted from the revised manuscript due to the deficiency of related proof.

 

 

Referee #2:

Q1. Authors reported negatively charged membrane but they did not studied membrane conductivity, which is essential property to asses, the suitability of charged membrane.

Answer: As the referee’s comment pointed out, membrane conductivity is really the essential property to evaluate the suitability of charged membrane, especially for their applications in fuel cells. However, for their applications in environmental field, such as the removal of heavy metal ions from the aqueous solution, membrane conductivity seems to be less important. This is because in this case we mainly concern the ion-exchange capacity rather than the proton conductivity. Consequently, we think it is not necessary to highlight membrane conductivity of the prepared negatively charged hybrid membranes and these data were not reported in this manuscript.

 

Q2. Extremely low ion-exchange capacities of developed membranes (0.2-0.3 mmol g-1) jeopardize their applications.

   Answer: As the referee’s comment pointed out, the ion-exchange capacities (IECs) of the prepared membranes were relatively lower. Thus will influence their applications as adsorbent for the removal of heavy metal ions from water. This is the reason why the adsorption behaviors for removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions using these hybrid membranes were not reported in this study.

For their applications in industry especially in environmental field, further work is thus required to optimize the membrane preparation process so as to highly elevate the IEC values of these hybrid membranes. We believe this problem will be solved with the further improvement on membrane properties and optimization of operational parameters. When the membrane properties are improved and ideal IECs are obtained, their adsorption behaviors for removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions will be further investigated, which will be our future job. This explain has been added in the revised manuscript, please see lines 5-14 on page 13.

 

Q3. A membrane should have good mechanical stability for its applications. But author failed to include any information on the mechanical stability of the membrane.

Answer: As the referee’s comment pointed out, good mechanical stability of a membrane can conduce to its application especially for its use in industrial separation by pressure. Geneally speaking, organic membrane has lower mechanical strength and stability, it can not meet the need of separation in industry. Consequently, hybridization technique is used to increase the membrane’s mechanical and stability. Nonetheless, for hybrid membranes potentially used in non-pressure operating condition, thermal stability may be more attractive in that they expects to be used in higher temperature and strongly oxidizing circumstances for industrial applications (as stated in the abstract). In our case, the prepared membranes expect to be used in environmental field, not be used to separate species by pressure, thus we mainly concern their thermal stability rather than their mechanical strength. Due to these reasons, the thermal stability of the prepared membranes was highlighted and the mechanical stability of the membrane was not reported in this manuscript.

 

Q4. Author should also include proposed applications for the reported membranes. It would have been better that author should complete their investigation for adsorption behaviors for removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions using reported membranes and report the findings also. This would have been attractive feature of the manuscript.

Answer: This comment was highly appreciated. The explain was given in question 2, please see the answer to question 2 and the lines 5-14 on page 13 in the revised text. The main purpose of this manuscript is to develop new preparation technique of negatively charged hybrid membranes. As the referee’s comment suggested,when the membrane properties are greatly improved, their applications in industry will be further investigated.

 

 

Finally, we appreciate very much for your time in editing our manuscript and the referees for their valuable suggestions and comments. I am looking forward to hearing from your final decision when it is made.

虽然有一些实验没有补充,但是文章还是发表了。

本文引用地址:http://www.sciencenet.cn/blog/user_content.aspx?id=252831

向国内和国外SCI投稿的几点感触

     早就想写一写自己的科研经历了,只是一直觉得自己的资质可能不够怕误导了大家。今年6月就要博士毕业,论文刚写完。因为要继续在中科院留所工作,感觉没太大压力。也该把过去几年的科研经历总结一下了,希望对别人也有帮助吧。
     过去几年里写了几篇SCI论文,接收或发表的有国内的5篇,包括两个中国科学D,一个科学通报,两个地质学报-英文版,还有一篇国外的Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Res。当然也被国外Chemical Geology 拒过稿。
     我是做岩石地球化学研究方向,合适投稿的期刊挺多。写第一篇的时候,真的是就想弄一篇国内的以毕业,因为中科院要至少1篇SCI论文才能毕业。第一次审回的判决是改后再审,刚开始吓一跳,因为这就是半死不活的意思。仔细斟酌后发现,两位审稿者的意见有些外行,但是还是要认真对待啊,尽管都是基本问题,还不能说人家提到的问题不重要。回答了一通,旁证博引。老板看了我的Reply 之后,说别这么大的手笔,一棒子打死不好。终于写的比较委婉,对方没脾气就直接接受了。我是个认真的人,这时心里觉得不是滋味。因为我没有通过审稿过程得到提升,而是花费大量时间在应付。后来的几篇也都是在国内投,对审回意见的感触都很相似。其中一篇我写的是关于大洋中脊的岩石圈热结构的论文,还得到相关国外一著名教授的评价。后来,国内审稿人的意见是:该研究对陆地上相关研究领域有重要意义,而且是被国外某某教授修改过的,可以直接发表。这个是我第一篇被直接接受的论文,但我想这洋中脊动力学过程本身就是十分重要的,却得到的评语只有在陆地相关研究方面的意义?看来是送给搞陆地研究的人手里了,其它评语一概没有,心里开始挺兴奋,本来直接接受论文就是件振奋人心的事。这是我第5篇国内SCI论文了,兴奋了一天不到,就有了点沉思:是谁认可了我的论文?
     其实,我在接受了第一篇国内SCI论文之后,就想下一篇试试国外的。这个想法得到老板的回答是:我鼓励你投国外,但是你要先有数量再有质量,以后才能在科研路上顺心。时下,我也是因为一篇稿子被chemical Geology 拒稿,就没作多想。
  直到最近投在Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Res上接受一篇稿子之后,才第一次觉得自己的科研结果可以被叫做成果。因为,这篇稿子经历了3次revise,每次都切中要害,审稿的是Nature的编委成员,本文与其方向十分相关。第一次的意见使我改了半个篇幅以证明自己观点,然后他还给的意见是“
There are some interesting and perhaps important observations in the data presented along with creative interpretations that give some redeeming aspects to the manuscript; eventually, this work should be published. However, at the present, I don’t see how this manuscript can be published given the issues discussed below.” 接下来的一个问题是很难回答的—数据太少了。尽管我不可能再增加数据,坦白说了数据不可能增加,最终老外还是通情达礼的“The authors have revised the science of this paper in ccordance with the comments by the reviewers, and in some cases argued that changes required were not exactly as outlined in the reviews.   I am inclined to generally accept these scientific responses, and if the writing was satisfactory, I would be willing to accept the paper for publication” 这就基本没什么问题了。


  中国总是喊口号说要高改革,建立优秀期刊,提高科研水平。结果现在国内科研水平不高,期刊更差,即便好 稿子都到国外了,甚至以投国际SCI稿子为极大光荣,单位也鼓励,例如,有不少单位在网站的论文快报栏里只提供国际SCI论文。当然,上层掌权人士想法总是好的,但要是不切实际,我所作为,那都无济于事。


  有个留过洋的朋友告诉我,老外对参考文献置信度顺序,从低到高一般是:中国人写的国内刊出的,中国人写的国内刊出但有老外参加的,中国人写的在国外刊出的,中国人写的在国外刊出有老外参加的,老外写的国内刊出,老外写的国外刊出。听了之后真的不舒服,老外偏见的确可恨,可国人呢?


  我也给国内SCI期刊的编辑部提出几点自己的小建议,仅供参考:(1)稿件一定要找方向相关的人审稿;(2)国内没有专家的稿子,请国外专家审;(3)编辑视情况给国内稿子找一个以上老外审稿;


  另外,还有一重要方面,如果实行,定有益处:强化和鼓励国内审稿人的责任感,例如,鼓励通过的稿件在刊出时的体现审稿人名字,文章以后被引用的次数也作为审稿人的荣誉加以提倡,当然无形中也限制了审稿人的不负责任的作为(随便通过一篇差的稿子或枪毙一篇优秀的稿子都是得不偿失的)。当然科研人员的能拿出手的审稿数也是个不错的个人荣誉认证。

SCI系列讲座


SCI系列讲座之一——认识SCI
http://player.youku.com/player.php/partnerid/XOTcy/sid/XMTU2NjUyNjQw/v.swf">
SCI系列讲座之二——利用ISI Web of Knowledge轻松开题
http://player.youku.com/player.php/partnerid/XOTcy/sid/XMTU2NjU1NjI0/v.swf">
SCI系列讲座之三——利用ISI Web of Knowledge快乐写作
http://player.youku.com/player.php/partnerid/XOTcy/sid/XMTU2NjM4MjM2/v.swf">
SCI系列讲座之四——利用ISI Web of Knowledge有效投稿
http://player.youku.com/player.php/partnerid/XOTcy/sid/XMTU2Njc4NTcy/v.swf">
SCI系列讲座之五——利用ResearcherID展示成果
http://player.youku.com/player.php/partnerid/XOTcy/sid/XMTU2Njc5NjEy/v.swf">



https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-39358-24973.html

上一篇:Elsevier科技论文写作培训大纲
下一篇:国外科技论文写作资源
收藏 IP: .*| 热度|

5 强涛 梅卫平 夏玉强 薛红 雷德明

发表评论 评论 (5 个评论)

数据加载中...

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )

GMT+8, 2023-2-1 14:03

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部