各位前辈,近期投稿,一审两位评审给出各自意见,请各前辈指点一下是否是被接受的节奏
晚辈新人,近期投稿,一审两位评审给出各自意见,请各前辈指点一下是否是被接受的节奏以及下一步注意事项,感谢大家,祝福大家
Your manuscript has been reviewed by two referees.
You will see that the reviewers indicated several corrections and additions needed before this paper can be accepted.
Please refer to the following comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviewer 1: This article seems to have some problems such as 1) forcible technique and 2) no experiment about active pure compounds. In addition, the significance of beginning the study from the prescriptions is not clear. Authors might be better to begin the study from crude drugs.
Reviewer 2: In Tables 1, 3, and 4, and line 10-11 in page 1, 2nd paragraph in page 3, “batch no.” may be mistake of “Product No.”. In usual, these extract granule products has 6 digits batch number ex. J29992. Batch number is assigned to a production lot and the lot size containing the individual products manufactured with a particular production recipe. The products which belongs to the same batch number are expected to be having exactly the same properties.
返回小木虫查看更多
京公网安备 11010802022153号
第一次发表求助,希望各位踊跃发言,万分感谢
改
请问能回答的具体一些吗?
感谢
评阅人1的不是很好改,不过也大致指出了一个修改方向,这需要你结合论文看看怎么改可以事半功倍一点,因为提到了研究意义,必须认真对待。评阅人2的就是挑了一些细节问题,对应修改就是,但是记得修改说明中要详细说明你怎么改的,最好一一列举,同时也要说对整个论文进行了审查,确定没有类似的问题。
只要认真修改,回答了对应的问题,我感觉接受的概率较高
,