投angew,两个审稿人，评价均偏正面，但编辑据稿，推荐了一个新期刊还未出影响因子，不想接受编辑推荐，审稿人每人四个问题，不难回答。请大家帮忙看看，这种情况下按审稿人意见修改重投机会有多大？欢迎真正重投过的人来出出意见。
1. Please rate the importance of the reported results

Reviewer #1: Highly important (top 20%)

Reviewer #2: Important
  
------------------------------------------------------------

2. Please rate the citation of previous publications

Reviewer #1: Appropriate

Reviewer #2: Appropriate
  
------------------------------------------------------------

3. Please rate the length of the manuscript

Reviewer #1: Concise

Reviewer #2: Concise
  
------------------------------------------------------------

4. Please rate the verification of hypotheses and conclusions by the presented data

Reviewer #1: Fully consistent

Reviewer #2: Minor inconsistencies
  
------------------------------------------------------------

5. Please indicate which other journal you consider more appropriate

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)
Review1
This is an interesting study .However, in the reviewer's opinion, there are still some points that are not clear at this time, especially to the mechanism aspects. Therefore, this reviewer suggests a major revision of this manuscript for publication in Angewandte Chemie based on the following points:
Reviewer2
The phenomenon is interesting and really needs some deep investigation. However, I have several important comments that need to be addressed before this paper could be considered. 返回小木虫查看更多