今天收到了投稿的结果，rejected；

第一反应是比较郁闷，等了3个多星期，连改的机会都没有给。之前在网上搜过MB的投稿经验，反应也没有说的那么慢。两个评审，意见截然不一样；

Reviewer #1: I do not see the benefit of using this protocol over previously reported protocols as described in xxx There is no really a consistency report (the authors would need to extract several 100s samples and provide evidence of conistent amplification), whereas all tissue used is what I consider 'easy' - young leaves and petals. As a matter of fact, you can extract RNA from petals even with RNeasy. Not MBio quality by any means. Why not use old leaves and see the quality of amplification? I know for a fact that there are protocols out there that can do this very efficiently, it's just that the authors did not dig deep enough.
确实是没有提到那么多材料，要是提了那么多材料，我不会选这个期刊。

Reviewer #2，

This paper proposes a simple, rapid and specific xxxxx and this is a subject of potential interest. However, this paper presents several incorrections that you must correct for its publication in Molecular Biotecnology. For that reason I consider that this manuscript must be carefully adjusted according to the suggestions I make below.然后是要修改的地方。

将几个长句子改短，加上没有标注的细节。几个句式的修改。

 

可能是已经改过几次有经验了，很快就改完，重新选了个期刊，投出去了。祝我好运吧。