英文审稿意见汇总

1、1、目标和结果不清晰。ItisnotedthatyourmanuscriptneedscarefuleditingbysomeonewithexpertiseintechnicalEnglisheditingpayingparticularattentiontoEnglishgrammar,spelling,andsentencestructuresothatthegoalsandresultsofthestudyarecleartothereader.2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 Ingeneral,thereisalackofexplanationofreplicatesandstat

2、isticalmethodsusedinthestudy. Furthermore,anexplanationofwhytheauthorsdidthesevariousexperimentsshouldbeprovided.3、对于研究设计的rationale:Also,therearefewexplanationsoftherationaleforthestudydesign.4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨：Theconclusionsareoverstated.Forexample,thestudydidnotshowifthesideeffectsfrominitialcoppe

3、rburstcanbeavoidwiththepolymerformulation.5、对hypothesis的清晰界定：Ahypothesisneedstobepresent©d6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念：Whatwastherationaleforthefilm/SBFvolumeratio?7、对研究问题的定义：Trytosettheproblemdiscussedinthispaperinmoreclear,writeonesectiontodefinetheproblem8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literaturereview:Thet

4、opicisnovelbuttheapplicationproposedisnotsonovel.9、对claim,如A>B的证明，verification:Thereisnoexperimentalcomparisonofthealgorithmwithpreviouslyknownwork,soitisimpossibletojudgewhetherthealgorithmisanimprovementonpreviouswork.10、严谨度问题：MNQiseasierthantheprimitivePNQS,howtoprovethat.11、格式（重视程度）： Inadditi

5、on,thelistofreferencesisnotinourstyle.Itisclosebutnotcompletelycorrect.Ihaveattachedapdf"InstructionsforAuthors"whichshowsexamples. Beforesubmittingarevisionbesurethatyourmaterialisproperlypreparedandformatted.Ifyouareunsure,pleaseconsulttheformattingnstructionstoauthorsthataregivenunderth

6、e"InstructionsandForms"buttoninheupperright-handcornerofthescreen.12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）：有关语言的审稿人意见： ItisnotedthatyourmanuscriptneedscarefuleditingbysomeonewithexpertiseintechnicalEnglisheditingpayingparticularattentiontoEnglishgrammar,spelling,andsentencestructuresothatthegoalsandresultsofthest

7、udyarecleartothereader. Theauthorsmusthavetheirworkreviewedbyapropertranslation/reviewingservicebeforesubmission;onlythencanaproperreviewbeperformed.Mostsentencescontaingrammaticaland/orspellingmistakesorarenotcompletesentences. Aspresented,thewritingisnotacceptableforthejournal.Thereareproblemswith

8、sentencestructure,verbtense,andclauseconstruction. TheEnglishofyourmanuscriptmustbeimprovedbeforeresubmission.Westronglysuggestthatyouobtainassistancefromacolleaguewhoiswell-versedinEnglishorwhosenativelanguageisEnglish. PleasehavesomeonecompetentintheEnglishlanguageandthesubjectmatterofyourpapergoo

9、verthepaperandcorrectit.? thequalityofEnglishneedsimproving.来自编辑的鼓励：Encouragementfromreviewers: Iwouldbeverygladtore-reviewthepaperingreaterdepthonceithasbeeneditedbecausethesubjectisinteresting. Thereiscontinuedinterestinyourmanuscripttitled""whichyousubmittedtotheJournalofBiomedicalMater

10、ialsResearch:PartB-AppliedBiomaterials.TheSubmissionhasbeengreatlyimprovedandisworthyofpublication.?Thepaperisveryannoyingtoreadasitisriddledwithgrammaticalerrorsandpoorlyconstructedsentences.Furthermore,thenoveltyandmotivationoftheworkisnotwelljustified.Also,theexperimentalstudyisshallow.Infact,Ica

11、ntfigureoutthelegendsasitistoosmall!Howdoesyoureffortcompareswithstate-of-the-art?Theexperimentisthemajorprobleminthepaper.Notonlythedatasetisnotpublished,butalsothedescriptionisveryrough.Itisimpossibletoreplicatetheexperimentandverifytheclaimoftheauthor.Furthermore,almostnodiscussionfortheexperimen

12、talresultisgiven.E.g.whytheauthorwouldobtainthisresult?Whichcomponentisthemostimportant?Anyfurtherimprovement?theauthorshouldconcentratedonthenewalgorithmwithyourideaandexplaineditsadvantagesclearlywithamostsimplewords.?itisgoodconcept,butneedtopolishlayout,language.?Theauthorsdidagoodjobinmotivatin

13、gtheproblemstudiedintheintroduction.Themathematicexplanationoftheproposedsolutionsisalsonice.Furthermore,thepaperisaccompaniedbyanadequatesetofexperimentsforevaluatingtheeffectivenessofthesolutionstheauthorspropose.?Apparently，Obviously,Innovation,refine,Inmyhumbleopinion如果仍然有需要修改的小毛病，一般你可以用youpaper

14、hasbeenconditionallyaccepted.Pleasereviseaccordingtoreviewcomments.如果是接受，你可以用Weareverypleasedtoinformyouthatyourpaper"xxxxx"hasbeenacceptedbyjournalname.PleaseprepareyourpaperbyjournaltemplateAtafirstglance,thisshortmanuscriptseemsaninterestingpieceofwork,reportingonxXFine,goodquality,buta

15、llthishasbeendoneandpublished,andnearlybecomeawell-knownphenomenon.Therefore,thereisinsufficientnoveltyorsignificancetomeetpublicationcriteria.Also,Ididnotseeanyexpermentalevidencehowthe*isrelatedwith*,exceptforthehand-wavingqualitativediscussion.Therefore,IcannotsupportitspublicationinJPDinitsprese

16、ntform.Itshouldberejected.建议去小木虫问问，那里有一些资源。thejournal'scopyeditorsshouldnothavetofixthemanyremainingerrors.IsympathizethatChineselanguagesdonothaveanequivalentofEnglisharticles'a,an,the'anddon'tseemtograspthematerialmeaningofthosewords.Theauthor'sEnglishexpertdecidedtoinsertthewo

17、rd'the'infrontofmostmentionsof"tip-tiltsystem."Thisimpliesthatthereisonlyonesystemandtheauthorsareusingitexclusively.Therearedoznsofothermisuses.Pages2,3,8,9,10,11,and12arelitteredwiththem.Thepaperistodifficulttoreadinitspresentform.感想：一篇好的论文，从内容到形式都需要精雕细琢。附1：中译审稿意见审稿意见1(1) 英文表达太差，

18、尽管意思大致能表达清楚，但文法错误太多。(2) 文献综述较差，观点或论断应有文献支持。(3) 论文读起来像是XXX的广告，不知道作者与XXX是否没有关联。(4) 该模式的创新性并非如作者所述，目前有许多XX采取此模式(如美国地球物理学会)，作者应详加调查并分析XXX运作模式的创新点。(5)该模式也不是作者所说的那样成功(审稿人结合论文中的数据具体分析)审稿意见2缺少直接相关的文献引用(如)。(2)写作质量达不到美国学术期刊的标准。审稿意见3(1) 作者应着重指出指出本人的贡献。(2) 缺少支持作者发现的方法学分析。(3) 需要采用表格和图件形式展示(数据)材料。附2：英文审稿意见(略有删节)R

19、eviewer:1Therearemanythingswrongwiththispaper.TheEnglishisverybad.Althoughthemeaningisbyandlargeclear,nottoomanysentencesarecorrect.Theliteraturereviewispoor.Thepaperisriddledwithassertionsandclaimsthatshouldbesupportedbyreferences.ThepaperreadsasanadvertisementforXXX.Itisnotclearthattheauthorisinde

20、pendentofXXX.TheAAmodelofXXXisnotasinnovativeastheauthorclaims.TherearenowmanyXXthatfollowthismodel(AmericanGeophysicalUnion,forexample),andtheauthorshouldsurveythesemodeltoseewhichonefirstintroducedtheelementsoftheXXXmodel.Themodelisalsonotassuccessfulastheauthorclaims.Overall,thepresentationandthe

21、contentsofthepapercanonlymeanthatIrejectthatthepaperberejected.Reviewer:2Thearetwomajorproblemswiththispaper:(1) Itismissingthecontextof(andcitationsto)whatisnowknowasthe"two-sided"marketliteratureincludingthatdirectlyrelatedto(e.g.Braunstein,JASIS1977;Economides&Katsanakas,Mgt.Sci.,20

22、06;McCabe&Snyder,B.E.JEconAnalysis,2007).(2) ThewritingqualityisnotuptothestandardofaUSscholarlyjournal.Reviewer:31. Theauthorshouldaccentuatehiscontributionsinthismanuscript.2. Itlacksanalyticalmethodologiestosupportauthorsdiscoveries3. Descriptionstylemateriallikethismanuscriptrequiresstructur

23、edtables&figuresforbetterpresentations.Ms.Ref.No.:*Title:*MaterialsScienceandEngineeringDearDr.*Reviewershavenowcommentedonyourpaper.Youwillseethattheyareadvisingthatyoureviseyourmanuscript.Ifyouarepreparedtoundertaketheworkrequired,Iwouldbepleasedtoreconsidermydecision.Foryourguidance,reviewers

24、'commentsareappendedbelow.Reviewer#1:Thisworkproposesanextensivereviewonmicromulsion-basedmethodsforthesynthesisofAgnanoparticles.Assuch,thematterisofinterest,howeverthepapersuffersfortwoseriouslimits:1) theoverallqualityoftheEnglishlanguageisratherpoor;2) someFiguresmustbeselectedfromprevio

25、usliteraturetodiscussalsothesynthesisofanisotropicallyshapedAgnanoparticles(thereareseveralexamplespublished),whichhasbeenlargelyoverlookedthroughoutthepaper.;-Oncetheaboveconcernsarefullyaddressed,themanuscriptcouldbeacceptedforpublicationinthisjournal.英文论文写作、投稿详解(整理各大学术论坛相关帖子，转帖)目前科技论文作者向国际英文科技期刊投

26、稿的方式有三种。一是传统的邮寄形式，即通过国际快件将论文的原稿邮寄给刊物的主编或编辑部。这种形式曾经是投稿的近乎唯一的方式，持续了漫长的岁月，可现在采用这种方式接受来稿的刊物越来越少了。二是用电子邮件的方式投稿，即作者将原稿的电子文件发至主编或编辑部的电子信箱。这种投稿方式显然比邮寄快得多，但与邮寄一样，稿件也有丢失的时候。目前采用这种纳稿方式的期刊还很多，但有很大一部分期刊己经在此基础上，又进了一步，发展到第三种也是目前最新的一种投稿方式，即网上投稿(ON-LINESUBMISSION)。这种方式速度快，而且稿件不会丢失。一旦作者在网上登记注册投稿，每个主要步骤都有记录，很受科技期刊作者的欢

27、迎。本文将就网上投稿过程及作者应该注意的地方予以详细的介绍，供对此感兴趣的中国作者参考。网上投稿的关键是要做好充分的准备工作。首先，作者对所要投稿的国际英文刊物的投稿需知(GUIDEFORAUTHORS)要了解清楚，并且按照要求准备好原稿的所有文件。一般科技论文分为回顾性文章(REVIEWARTICLE)，普通论文(REGULAR/RESEARCHARTICLE)，快讯(SHORTCOMMUNICATIONS)等。不同的文章类型，对原稿的格式要求也有所变化。单就普通论文而言，文章从头到尾的基本格式是：论文的开篇部分，包括文章标题(TITLE)，作者姓名(AUTHORSNAME)(注明通讯作者/

28、CORRESPONDINGAUTHOR)，作者单位地址(AFFILIATION),论文摘要(ABSTRACT),关键词(KEYWORDS)等；论文的正文部分，包括介绍/引言(INTRODUCTION)，实验方法(METHOD)，实验材料(MATERIAL)，结果与分析(RESULTSANDANALYSIS)，讨论(DISCUSSION),结论(CONCLUSION)等；需说明的是不同的学科，正文的内容和形式会有所增减，图表、公式的数量也会有所不同。正文后的结尾部分有的文章附加致谢辞(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)，有的则没有，但参考文献(REFERENCE)则是必须的。有的文章还带有附录(A

29、PPENDIX)，如全部的实验原始数据、计算机软件程序等。现在有的刊物可以在网上发表的文章中附带电子视听文件(E-COMPONENTS)。如短录像片(VIDEOCLIP),动画片(SHORTCARTOON)等。作者要根据自身的情况，选择文章应该包含的内容，一旦确定，所有的内容都要在网上投稿前准备好。此外，不但原稿的内容和格式要符合刊物的要术，而且在字数、页数、格式、文件储存形式等方面，均要与投稿刊物的要求一致。否则，文章在初选阶段会很快落选。其次，是作者对投稿刊物网上投稿系统的熟悉和学习。如果可能，最好请有这方面经验的作者上一课，可以节省时间和事半功倍。如果找不到合适的老师，作者自己要耐心地自

30、学。从刊物的网页入手，仔细阅读网上的投稿需知、跟踪链接或屏幕启示，把每个环节搞明白弄清楚。在网上投稿，头一步是在网页上注册，也叫作者登记。实际上与网上购物注册没太大区别，关键是要把自己的姓名、单位、联系地址，包括电话、传真和电子邮箱等登记准确无误。二是按部就班地输入文章的各个主要部分。如题目、作者、摘要、关键词、正文、图表等。在输入每个部分的时候，一是要通读该部分的有关要求，再次确认自已输入的文件是否符合要求。这听起来并不难，但实际上作者在这方面的疏忽却很多。比如按要求，原稿不能超过20页，可有的原稿长达40多页，甚至更长。有的文章作者完全忽略了刊物对关键词的要求，随心所欲。二是确认每个部分输

31、入的完整性。有些作者在输入文件时过于匆忙，十个图只输入一半，这样的稿件即使到了编辑部也不能送审，只能返回作者补漏。如果审校员一时疏忽或主编没有查觉，将有缺欠的文章发出送审，则审稿人因为缺图，不能正常审阅文章。这样造成的麻烦所耽误的时间会更多。三是输入文件完毕后，也就是所有的部分成功地输入后，不要忘了点击投稿发送键。否则，稿件只会存储在作者自已的文件夹中，而不是发到编辑部。目前，许多科技期刊网上投稿，需把文件由一种存储形式转换到另一种存储形式，比如DOC文件变成PDF文件。在这个转换过程中，计算机屏幕会呈停滞状态，看上去好像死机了。其实不然，只需耐心等待罢了。原稿在网上成功投出后，作者马上就能收

32、到编辑部的回执。如果有问题，屏幕上则会出现问题预警或解决问题的提示。如果作者不能自行解决故障或问题反复出现，作者可与出版社的网上投稿支持部门联系，求得帮助。此外值得一提的是，部分著名出版社的网页上除附有投稿需知外，还专门设计了针对网上投稿的指导示范文件。作者初学乍练时可以抽时间学习一下。总之，网上投稿并不难，关键是准备充分，而且在实际上机操作时按部就班，不能单纯求快，否则欲速而不达。编辑部收到稿件后，有的是直接送审，有的是先进行一步初选(主要是检查论文的英文是否过关)，然后再送审。不论是哪种情况，论文在送审前均需通过最基本的技术检查。目的是看原稿是否包含了应该有的基本内容。有些刊物的编辑部就设

33、在出版社内，这类期刊的检查会更全面，包括文件形式、内容、作者联系方式、文章是否属于重复性投稿等等。一旦发现问题（比如原稿过长，关键词不符合要求等），原稿会马上返回作者，进行必要的补充和修改。原稿一旦退回作者，文件便会重新回到作者自己在网上的投稿文件夹里，等候修改。与此同时，作者的电子信箱内同样会收到一封编辑部的来信，明确告之稿件应该进行修改或补充的地方。作者只需上网从自己的文件夹中调出文件修改即可。一旦文件修改完毕，作者又要根据出版社信函中的提示，上网按步骤再将原稿发回刊物的编辑部。这个操作过程和最开始的投稿大同小异，往往也要将DOC文件转换成PDF文件。原稿返回编辑部送审后，有的会很干脆地被

34、拒绝，有的会顺利地圆满接受，但大部分原稿需按审稿人的意见进行规模不同的修改。经过作者修改过的稿件又需要在网上重新发回编辑部。但有的作者在接到主编或编辑部转来的审稿人意见后，对其评价有很大的异议或不愿改动自己的论文，便可以主动要求退稿。手续很简单，只需向编辑部发个电子邮件即可或自己上网撤稿。如果作者愿意根据审稿人的意见改动论文，则需改得全面彻底，并且对审稿人提出的疑问要一一做答。这份单独的问答要整理成一份单独的文件，在网上再次发稿时使用。如果缺少这份问答文件，在许多期刊网上投发修改稿时会出现障碍，应引起作者的注意。修改后的论文要从作者网上的论文文件夹里发给编辑部，最初的原稿可以存储在文件夹中，可

35、作者一定要确定第二次投出的稿件是修改后的文件，而不是初稿。这种张冠李戴的事在网上投稿过程中时有发生。文件名称明明显示是修改稿，可审稿人打开文件后才发现是初稿又原封不动地回来了，让人有点哭笑不得。修改过的稿件回到编辑部后，原稿的编码序号不变，只是多了一或二个尾数，表明是修改稿。有的稿件改动一次即可被刊物采纳，但也有的要反复修改多次才能被通过。对被否定的文章，如果作者对否定的原因有异议，可以向编辑部或主编提出自己的意见，据理力争。如果主编同意作者的意见，文章可以重新进入新的一轮审稿程序。这种情况不多，但在网上这样的文章也同样记录在案。在网上投出的稿件不论改动多少回，其序号都不会改变，只有尾数的变动

36、，以表明是修改后的第几稿。比如R1是第一次修改稿，R2是第二份修改稿，依此类推。但每份修改过的文件在网上都有记录，而且每份审稿人的意见也都记录在案。不单如此，整个审稿过程中经过刊物网页发给作者的电子邮件也都有记录。总之，每一个步骤都有据可查，只要整个系统不出问题，就不会有稿件丢失的情况发生。由此可见，网上投稿的好处的确很多，难怪深受广大作者的欢迎。现在有许多科技期刊已经告别了邮寄和电子邮件的时代，开始只受理网上投稿。今后，这样的期刊可能会越来越多。所以，能自如地驾驭好网上投稿这个新的投稿手段，对学者们而言无疑是件好事。附录1.SCI投稿信件的一些套话一、投稿信1. DearDr.Defendi

37、ML:Iamsendingamanuscriptentitled""bwhichIshouldliketosubmitforpossiblepublicationinthejournalof-.Yourssincerely2. DearDr.A:Enclosedisamanuscriptentitled“”bysb,whichwearesubmittingforpublicationinthejournalof-.Wehavechosenthisjournalbecauseitdealswith-.Webelievethatsthwouldbeofinteresttothe

38、journalsreaders.3. DearDr.A:Pleasefindenclosedforyourreviewanoriginalresearcharticle,Allauthorshavereadandapprovethisversionofthearticle,andduecarehasbeentakentoensuretheintegrityofthework.Nopartofthispaperhaspublishedorsubmittedelsewhere.Noconflictofinterestexitsinthesubmissionofthismanuscript,andw

39、ehaveattachedtothisletterthesignedlettergrantinguspermissiontouseFigure1fromanothersource.Weappreciateyourconsiderationofourmanuscript,andwelookforwardtoreceivingcommentsfromthereviewers.二、询问有无收到稿件DearEditors,Wedispatchedourmanuscripttoyourjournalon3August2006buthavenot,asyet,receiveacknowledgemento

40、ftheirsafearrival.Wefearthatmayhavebeenlostandshouldbegratefulifyouwouldletusknowwhetherornotyouhavereceivedthem.Ifnot,wewillsendourmanuscriptagain.Thankyouinadvanceforyourhelp.三、询问论文审查回音DearEditors，Itismorethan12weekssinceIsubmittedourmanuscript(No:)forpossiblepublicationinyourjournal.Ihavenotyetre

41、ceivedareplyandamwonderingwhetheryouhavereachedadecision.Ishouldappreciatedyourlettingmeknowwhatyouhavedecidedassoonaspossible.四、关于论文的总体审查意见1. Thisisacarefullydonestudyandthefindingsareofconsiderableinterest.Afewminorrevisionarelistbelow.2. Thisisawell-writtenpapercontaininginterestingresultswhichme

42、ritpublication.Forthebenefitofthereader,however,anumberofpointsneedclarifyingandcertainstatementsrequirefurtherjustification.Therearegivenbelow.3. Althoughtheseobservationareinteresting,theyareratherlimitedanddonotadvanceourknowledgeofthesubjectsufficientlytowarrantpublicationinPNAS.Wesuggestthatthe

43、authorstrysubmittingtheirfindingstospecialistjournalsuchas-4. Althoughthispaperisgood,itwouldbeeverbetterifsomeextradatawereadded.5. Thismanuscriptisnotsuitableforpublicationinthejournalof-becausethemainobservationitdescribewasreported3yearsagoinareputablejournalof-.6. PleaseasksomeonefamiliarwithEn

44、glishlanguagetohelpyourewritethispaper.Asyouwillsee,Ihavemadesomecorrectionatthebeginningofthepaperwheresomesyntaxisnotsatisfactory.7. WefeelthatthispotentiallyinterestingstudyhasbeenmarredbyaninabilitytocommunicatethefindingcorrectlyinEnglishandshouldliketosuggestthattheauthorsseektheadviceofsomeon

45、ewithagoodknowledgeofEnglish,preferablenativespeaker.8. Thewordingandstyleofsomesection,particularlythoseconcerningHPLC,needcarefulediting.AttentionshouldbepaidtothewordingofthosepartsoftheDiscussionofandSummarywhichhavebeenunderlined.9. Preliminaryexperimentsonlyhavebeendoneandwithexceptionofthatsu

46、mmarizedinTable2,nonehasbeenrepeated.Thisisclearlyunsatisfactory,particularlywhenthereissomuchvariationbetweenassays.10. Theconditionofincubationarepoorlydefined.Whatisthetemperature?Wereantibodyused?五、给编辑的回信1. Inreplytotherefereesmaincriticismofpaper,itispossibletosaythat-Oneminorpointraisedbythere

47、fereeconcernsoftheextracompositionofthereactionmixtureinFigure1.Thishasnowbeencorrected.Furtherminorchangeshadbeenmadeonpage3,paragraph1(line3-8)and2(line6-11).Thesedonotaffectourinterpretationoftheresult.2. Ihavereadtherefereescommentsverycarefullyandconcludethatthepaperhasbeenrejectedonthesolegrou

48、ndsthatitlaketoxicitydata.IadmitthatIdidnotincludeatoxicitytableinmyarticlealthoughperhapsIshouldhavedone.Thiswasforthesakeofbrevityratherthananerrororomission.3. Thankyouforyourletterof-andforthereferee'commentsconcerningourmanuscriptentitled“”.Wehavestudiedtheircommentscarefullyandhavemadecorr

49、ectionwhichwehopemeetwiththeirapproval.4. Ienclosedarevisedmanuscriptwhichincludesareportofadditionalexperimentsdoneattherefereesusggestion.Youwillseethatouroriginalfindingsareconfirmed.5. Wearesendingtherevisedmanuscriptaccordingtothecommentsofthereviewers.Revisedportionareunderlinedinred.6. Wefoun

50、dtherefereecomsmentsmosthelpfulandhaverevisedthemanuscript7. Wearepleasedtonotethefavorablecommentsofreviewersintheiropeningsentence.8. Thankyouforyourletter.IamverypleasedtolearnthatourmanuscriptisacceptableforpublicationinCancerResearchwithminorrevision.9. Wehavethereforecompletedafurtherseriesofe

51、xperiments,theresultofwhicharesummarizedinTable5.Fromthisweconcludethatintrinsicfactorisnotaccount.10. Wedeletedtherelevantpassagesincetheyarenotessentialtothecontentsofthepaper.11. IfeelthatthereviewerscommentsconcerningFigures1and2resultfromamisinterpretationofthedata.12. Wewouldhaveincludeanon-pr

52、oteininhibitorinoursystem,asacontrol,ifonehadbeenavailable.13. WeprefertoretaintheuseofTable4forreasonsthatitshouldbeclearfromthenewparagraphinsertedattheendoftheResultssection.14. Althoughreviewerdoesnotconsideritisimportanttomeasurethetemperatureofthecells,weconsideritessential.15. Therunningtitle

53、hasbeenchangedto“”.16. TheMaterialsandMethodssectionnowincludesdetailsformeasuringuptakeofisotopeandassayinghexokinase.17. TheconcentrationofHATmedia(page12paragraph2)wasincorrectlystatedintheoriginalmanuscript.Thishasbeenrectified.Theauthorsaregratefultotherefereesforpointingouttheirerror.18. Assug

54、gestedbybothreferees,adiscussionofthepossibilityoflaseractiononchromosomehasbeenincluded(page16,paragraph2).19. Weincludedanewsetofphotographswithbetterdefinitionthanthoseoriginallysubmittedandtowhichascalehasbeenadded.20. Followingthesuggestionofthereferees,wehaveredrawFigure3and4.21. Twofurtherpap

55、ers,publishedsinceouroriginalsubmission,havebeenaddedtothetextandReferencesection.Theseare:22. Weshouldliketothanktherefereesfortheirhelpfulcommentsandhopethatwehavenowproducedamorebalanceandbetteraccountofourwork.Wetrustthattherevisedmanuscriptisacceptableforpublication.23. Igreatlyappreciatebothyo

56、urhelpandthatoftherefereesconcerningimprovementtothispaper.Ihopethattherevisedmanuscriptisnowsuitableforpublication.24. Ishouldliketoexpressmyappreciationtoyouandtherefereesforsuggestinghowtoimproveourpaper.25. Iapologizeforthedelayinrevisingthemanuscript.Thiswasduetoourdoinganadditionalexperiment,a

57、ssuggestedbyreferees.附录2.Elsevier投稿各种状态总结1. SubmittedtoJournal当上传结束后，显示的状态是SubmittedtoJournal,这个状态是自然形成的无需处理。2. Witheditor如果在投稿的时候没有要求选择编辑，就先到主编那，主编会分派给别的编辑。这当中就会有另两个状态：3. Editorassigned4. EditorDeclinedInvitation如果编辑接手处理了就会邀请审稿人了。5. Reviewer(s)invited如果审稿人接受那就会是以下状态：6. Underreview这应该是一个漫长的等待。当然前面各步骤也可能很慢的，要看编辑的处理情况。如果被邀请审稿人不想审，就会decline,编辑会重新邀请别的审稿人。7. requiredreviewcompleted审稿结束，等编辑处理。8. DecisioninProcess到了这一步就快要有结果了，编辑开始考虑是给修改还是直接拒，当然也有可能直接接受的，但可能性很小，呵呵。9. Minorrevision/Majorrevision这个时候可以稍微庆祝一下了，问题不大了，因为有修改就有可能。具体怎么