sci投稿有关信件的写法-第1部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

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　ments　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　municate　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　position　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　ments　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　ments　concerning　our　manuscript　entitled　“”。　We　have　studied　their　ments　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　ments　of　the　reviewers。　Revised　portion　are　underlined　in　red。　
6。　We　found　the　referee’s　ments　most　helpful　and　have　revised　the　manuscript　
7。　We　are　pleased　to　note　the　favorable　ments　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　pleted　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　ments　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　ments　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。