大修 大家帮忙看看这样的审稿意见有戏吗 IF=4左右的期刊
Editor's and/or reviewers' comments:
Reviewer #1: Overall, this is a nice paper describing the synthesis and testing of a novel XX for gas chromatography. Following are several recommendations for improvement:
1..............(六七条建议意见)
2…………
3
4
5
6
7…………
Reviewer #2: This work investigated two XX for GC separations. As described, they exhibited good separation performance and showed the potential for practical use. Besides, the manuscript was well organized. Unfortunately, this work did not show sufficient novelty and advancement in comparison to their previous reports as listed in refs. 15-16. On the basis of its insufficiency in novelty, the manuscript is not recommended for consideration of its publication in XX.
Specific comments:
1.XX grafted by diverse types of XX as GC XX have been well documented in the literature. In this work, these two XX did not show significant difference in selectivity from each other and from the previous ones
返回小木虫查看更多
京公网安备 11010802022153号
呵呵祝福
,
祝福楼主了。
.
祝福