lemon2008 发表于 2016-5-10 21:10:04

Response to review 修稿回信套话

1. 外审专家对于表 1 中 xxx 所提出 的问题现已改正。而后面的一些小改动则不会影响文章对结果的解释。
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1 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. 我非常仔细地阅读了外审专家的意见, 而且我认为文章仅仅因为缺少 xxx 而被拒绝刊 登的。我承认本应在文中包含 xx x 。 然后这仅是 出于对文章简洁的考量,没有提供相关数据, 而非疏忽。
I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lacked 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. 谢谢您对于我文章“ XXX ” 的回复以及 外审专家的意见。我们已经仔细研究了他们的 意见,并做了相应的改正,希望获得他们的认可。
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. 我随信附上修过的文章,其中增添了在 外审专家建议下新做的实验报告,可进一步证 实原有结论。
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. 我们附上依照审稿专家的意见修改的原稿,其中修改部分用红色划线标注。
We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.
6. 外审专家的意见对我们很有帮助,我们已经按照这些意见对原稿做了修改。
We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript
7. 很高兴得知审稿专家对文章的好评We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.
8. 感谢你的来信。我很高兴稿件经修改后可在XXX杂志发表。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. 为此,我们进行了一系列进一步的实 验,结果见表5的总结。由此我们得出结论内在的因素起不到什么作用。
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 does not account.
10. 我们删除了对文章不重要的段落。We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.

lemon2008 发表于 2016-5-10 21:10:38

11. 我觉得外审专家对于xxx的评论有些误解。I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.
12. 如果在我们的系统中有非蛋白抑制剂,我们就会将其设为控制组。We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available.
13. 我们希望保留表4,在结果部分新加入的一段话帮助解释了其存在的意义。
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. 尽量审稿专家并不认为有必要测量细 胞的温度,我们却不这样认为。Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.
15. 页眉标题已改为“”The running title has been changed to “”.
16. 在材料与方法段中已包括了xxx的细节。The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.
17. 原稿中对于xxx的描述不正确,现已纠正。很感谢外审专家的指正。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. 依照两位外审专家的建议,现增添了对于XXX的讨论。As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2).
19. 较原来的图片,我们在新的一组图片 中增加了对比例尺的定义。We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.
20. 根据外审专家的意见,我们已重新绘制了图3和4。Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.
21. 我在文章的正文和参考文献中增加了 对投稿后发表的另外两篇文章的引用。这两篇文章是:Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:
22. 很感谢外审专家的宝贵意见,希望修改后的文章更公平的、完整地记录了我们的研 究工作。我们相信修订后的稿件可以达到出版要求。
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 blication.
23. 我非常感谢您和外审专家对于文章修改方面给予的帮助。希望修后稿件可以在贵刊发表。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. 很感谢您和外审专家对于稿件修改方面的建议。I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for
suggesting how to improve our paper.
25.很抱歉由于额外新做实验而导致返修稿件时间上的延误。I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees.

lemon2008 发表于 2016-5-10 21:14:19

首先,绝对服从编辑的意见。在审稿人给出各自的意见之后,编辑一般不会再提出自己的意见。但是,编辑一旦提出某些意见,就意味着他认为这是文章里的重大缺陷,至少是不合他的口味。这时,我们唯一能够做的只能是服从。因为毕竟是人家掌握着生杀予夺的大权。
第二,永远不要跟审稿人争执。跟审稿人起争执是非常不明智的一件事情。审稿人意见如果正确那就不用说了,直接照办就是。如果不正确的话,也大可不必在回复中冷嘲热讽,心平气和的说明白就是了。大家都是青年人,血气方刚,被人拍了当然不爽,被人错拍了就更不爽了。尤其是一些名门正派里的弟子,看到一审结果是major而不是minor本来就已经很不爽了,难得抓住审稿人的尾巴,恨不得拖出来打死。有次审稿,一个审稿人给的意见是增加两篇参考文献(估计也就是审稿人自己的文章啦),结果作者在回复中写到,making a reference is not charity!看到之后我当时就笑喷了,可以想象审稿人得被噎成什么样。正如大家所想的那样,这篇稿子理所当然的被拒了,虽然后来经编辑调解改成了major revision,但毕竟耽误的是作者自己的时间不是?
第三,合理掌握修改和argue的分寸。所谓修改就是对文章内容进行的修改和补充,所谓argue就是在回复信中对审稿人的答复。这其中大有文章可做,中心思想就是容易改的照改,不容易改的或者不想改的跟审稿人argue。对于语法、拼写错误、某些词汇的更换、对某些公式和图表做进一步解释等相对容易做到的修改,一定要一毫不差的根据审稿意见照做。而对于新意不足、创新性不够这类根本没法改的,还有诸如跟算法A,B,C,D做比较,补充大量实验等短时间内根本没法完成的任务,我们则要有理有据的argue。在Argue的时候首先要肯定审稿人说的很对,他提出的方法也很好,但本文的重点是blablabla,跟他说的不是一回事。然后为了表示对审稿人的尊重,象征性的在文中加上一段这方面的discussion,这样既照顾到了审稿人的面子,编辑那也能交待的过去。
第四,聪明的掌握修改时间。拿到审稿意见,如果是minor,意见只有寥寥数行,那当然会情不自禁的一蹴而就,一天甚至几小时搞定修改稿。这时候,问题在于要不要马上投回去了?我的意见是放一放,多看一看,两个星期之后再投出去。这样首先避免了由于大喜过望而没能及时检查出的小毛病,还不会让编辑觉得你是在敷衍他。如果结果是major,建议至少放一个月再投出去,显得比较郑重。

lemon2008 发表于 2016-5-10 21:16:14

写答复信的唯一目的是让编辑和审稿人一目了然的知道我们做了哪些修改。因此,所有的格式和写法都要围绕这一目的。一般来说可以把答复信分成三部分,即List of Actions, Responses to Editor, Responses to Reviewers。第一部分List of Actions的作用是简明扼要的列出所有修改的条目,让编辑和审稿人在第一时间对修改量有个概念,同时它还充当着修改目录的作用,详见下面的例子。剩下的两部分是分别对编辑和审稿人所做的答复,格式可以一样,按照“意见”-“argue”(如果有的话)-“修改”这样逐条进行。清楚醒目起见,可以用不同字体分别标出,比如“意见”用italic,“argue”正常字体,“修改”用bold。下面举例说明各部分的写法和格式。
编辑意见:请在修改稿中用双倍行距。
审稿人1:
? ?? ???意见1:置疑文章的创新性,提出相似的工作已经被A和B做过。
? ?? ???意见2:算法表述不明确。
? ?? ???意见3:对图3的图例应做出解释。
审稿人2:
? ?? ???意见1:图2太小。
? ?? ???意见2:第3页有个错别字。
很显然,根据上面的答复策略,我们准备对除1号审稿人意见1之外的所有意见进行相应改动,而对1.1采取argue为主的策略。答复如下:
List of Actions
LOA1: The revised manuscript is double spaced.
LOA2: A discussion on novelty of this work and a comparison with A and B have been added in page 3.
LOA3: A paragraph has been added in page 5 to further explain the algorithm ***.
LOA4: Explanations of the legend of Figure 3 have been added in page 7.
LOA5: Figure 2 has been enlarged.
LOA6: All typos have been removed.
Responses to Editor
请在修改稿中用双倍行距。
We have double spaced the text throughout the revised manuscript, see LOA1.
Responses to Reviewers
To Reviewer 1:
意见1:置疑文章的创新性,提出相似的工作已经被A和B做过。
Thank you for pointing this out. A and B’s research groups have done blablablabla. However, the focus of our work is on blablablabla, which is very different from A and B’s work, and this is also the major contribution of our work. We have added the following discussion on this issue in our revised manuscript, see LOA2.
“blablablabla(此处把A和B的工作做一个review,并提出自己工作和他们的区别之处)”
意见2:算法表述不明确。
We have added the following discussion to further explain algorithm ***, see LOA3.
“blablablabla(此处进一步解释该算法)”
意见3:对图3的图例应做出解释。
We have added the following explanations of the legend of Figure 3, see LOA3.
“blablablabla(图3图例的解释)”
To Reviewer 2:
意见1:图2太小。
We have enlarged Figure 2, see LOA 4.
意见2:第3页有个错别字。
We have removed all typos, see LOA5.

lemon2008 发表于 2016-5-10 21:16:37

完成对审稿意见的回答后,还要写一封response “cover letter"给“编辑”,报告我们已经完成回复,尤其对审稿人共同关心的问题做一些说明,同时表示我们愿意接受必要的进一步修改的意见。这样可以给编辑留下好印象,有助于编辑积极促成我们的论文发表。
Dear Dr. ...
We have responded to all the questions by the reviewers with answers or explanations, and have revised our paper accordingly.We hope they will be satisfied.?We are willing to provide further information if they think it necessary.
We thank the reviewers for their valuable advice, and are grateful to you for all the favor you?have done us.
As to the language, we do have asked Prof. ... to help us with the revision again. She is an American with science education.If you think the revision is still not in fluent enough English, would you please help us find an expert to improve the language for us. We will pay for the improvement.

lemon2008 发表于 2016-5-10 21:17:46

对审稿意见的回答常用句型
Response: we followed the suggestions in the manuscript.
Response: we changed ....... to ....... throughout the paper, including in the text and figures.
Response: we have tried to find the reference the reviewer suggested but failed. Instead, we think it may probably ...... We added some explanations in the discussion part.
Response: we agree with this suggestion and provided more detail information about ......
Response: we added the method of ....
Response: we are very appreciated with these important suggestions by the reviewer and agree with this.
We made some corresponding changes in the manuscript and below are our clarifications. First, .......
As suggested by the reviewer, we used ....
Response: we added the data processing information in section ......
Response: we consider it is necessary to give more detail information about the data used. ........
Response: see our explanations with concerns of No...
Response: we checked throughout the manuscript and removed these parts into a new discussion part.
Response: We are sorry for this mistake.
Response: we added the error bars as suggested.
Response: page numbers were added in this revision.
Response: we got help from a native speaker to proofread the paper and the reference citations were changed to follow the journal format.
Response: we added more information about .......
Response: we added this reference to give a better introduction of .......
Response: additional information were added to better description of this site.
Response: in section 2.5, we provided a more detail information of ........
Response: we added an explanation of ......
Response: information was added in section ....
Response: we agree with the suggestions by the reviewer, perhaps because we authors are not native speakers...... The revision will be proofread by a native speaker and we are trying to make it clear and consistent.
Response: We agree with this concern. Due to ....... Our experiments .......Thus, the method may work in the early stage. For the late, especially the senesces, more work will be needed. We will continue this method in future research. We added some clarifications in the discussion part.
Response: we consider it’s right to concern more about the ...... We added a new discussion part to better evaluate our method, especially for the limitations.
Response: we changed the unit of ...... in the revised version so that this result could be better compared with other literatures.
Response: we followed this suggestion and made changes throughout the paper.
Response: we removed some part of method in section.....as a new part of methodology.
Response: we checked throughout the paper and made corrections where needed.
Response: we added the units of variables both in the text and in figures.
Response: we changed the color in figures.
Response: we checked through the manuscript and made changes accordingly.
Response: all references were checked for consistency.
Response: we followed this suggestion.
Response: we agree with the concern and provide more information about the stages of maize. The limitations were also stated in the new discussion part.
Response: we agree with this suggestion and we added a new part of further validation of our method with additional discussions.
页: [1] 2
查看完整版本: Response to review 修稿回信套话