ÈçÌ⣬ÂÛÎÄÒ»Éó»ØÀ´Áù¸öÉó¸åÈË£¬5¸öÉó¸åÈËÒâ¼û¶¼ºÜ»ý¼«(ÈçReviewer #1: The presentation is generally clear and unambiguous but minor editing is required throughout. Rewiewer #2, The manuscript is clear and well written, although showing some mistakes. Rewiewer #5: This paper presents good information of ....., Overall, the manuscript is well presented. °üÀ¨¸±Ö÷±àReviewer #3µÄÒâ¼ûҲͦºÃµÄ£¬the contribution of this paper is interesting £©£¬1¸ö±È½Ï¸ºÃ棬´óÐÞ£¬Òâ¼ûûÓÐÐèÒª²¹ÊµÑ飬Ö÷ÒªÊÇÉó¸åÈ˵ÄһЩÒÉÎÊ£¬µ«ÌáµÄÓïÑÔÎÊÌâÒ²½Ï¶à£¬(ÈçÓиöÉó¸åÈËThe paper is generally well conceptualized, some segments in the material and methods, and in the results and discussions need to be reworked and/or clarified (see specific comments). Some sections of the paper are poorly written, probably as a result of multiples (writers). Some editorial changes are required to maintain a homogenous and consistent style throughout the paper. )
ÈÏÕæ»Ø¸´ÁË6¸öÉó¸åÈ˵ÄÿÌõÒâ¼ûÖ®ºó£¬»Ø¸´Òâ¼ûÓÐ1Íò1ǧ¶à×Ö£¬ÓÐÎÄÕµÄÁ½¸öƪ·ù³¤£¬20¶àÌì¶þÉóÒâ¼û»ØÀ´¸±Ö÷±à¾ÍÕâôһÌõÒâ¼û£¬I regret to inform you that the reviewers of your manuscript have advised against publication, and I must therefore reject it. English usage and grammar are still very poor.
ÒÔÇ°Ò²·¢¹ý¼¸ÆªSCI£¬»ù±¾¶¼ÊÇÈÏÕæ´óÐÞºóÖ±½Ó½ÓÊÕ¡£
ûÏëµ½Õâ´Î¾ÓÈ»ÓÉÓÚÓïÑÔÎÊÌâ¾Ü¸å£¬¿ÉÄÜÐÞ¸ÄʱÓïÑÔÎÊÌâҲûÔõô·ÅÐÄÉÏ£¬×¼±¸ÏÈÕÒ¸öÈóÉ«¹«Ë¾ÐÞ¸ÄÏÂÓïÑÔ£¬ÔÙÖØÐÂÌá½»£¬¸÷λ´óÉñ¾õµÃ¿ÉÐÐÂ𣿻¹ÊÇÏÈ·¢Óʼþ¸ø¸±Ö÷±àÉêËß˵ÎÒÃÇ×¼±¸ÔٺúÃÈóÉ«ÏÂÓïÑÔ£¬¿´ÄÜ·ñ¸ø¸öÐ޸Ļú»á£¿»òÕß´ó¼ÒÓÐʲôºÃµÄ½¨Ò飬лл£¡
»¹ÓУ¬ÉêËßÐÅÔõôд£¬Ð»Ð»´ó¼ÒÁË£¡ |