24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 1693  |  回复: 6
【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题,作者miss可人儿将赠送您 6 个金币
当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖,点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

miss可人儿

新虫 (初入文坛)

[求助] 副主编据稿,主编鼓励重投,这种情况该怎么办 已有1人参与

请大家帮我看一下,还有必要重投吗?审稿人一个很负面,两个小修吧。副主编负面意见。主编据稿鼓励重投。
主编--------The above-noted manuscript is not suitable for publication in the Canadian Journal of Forest Research in its current form; comments of the Associate Editor and Reviewers are found below.  The review team believes that the manuscript could ultimately make a good contribution, but the changes required are judged to be too substantive to be accommodated within a normal revision process.  We would, however, be interested in eventually publishing a manuscript on this topic and therefore encourage you to make the necessary changes and resubmit the new manuscript to our Journal. We note that the English grammar needs considerable work; if you do not have access to a native English speaker to proofread your manuscript, Canadian Science Publishing recommends the services of editage.com.If you decide to resubmit a manuscript, please include a cover letter and describe how you have addressed the major concerns of the referees and the Associate Editor.  Please find their comments attached.

副主编------Associate Editor Comments to the Author:
The manuscript was seen by three independent reviewers. I am following the opinion of one of them in that the study brings little news, other than the application of established techniques for a confer species that hitherto has not been subjected to somatic embryogenesis - there is little other innovation. Furthermore, the description lacks some important details, and aspects of the interpretation of some of the results are questioned by the other reviewers. This concerns e.g. a possible genotype vs. mother tree effect. I agree it is the mother tree, but with that comes the complication that slight differences in maturity of the seeds may cause this difference - a long-known general effect in forest genetics ('the maternal effect'). Attention to the possible effects of polyembryony is another important hint from one of the reviewers. Additionally, the manuscript is not up to our linguistic standards.
回复此楼
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

miss可人儿

新虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
6楼: Originally posted by paperhunter at 2017-05-17 12:26:05
重投稿件有很大可能会落到原来的审稿人手中,如果楼主能够令人信服地回答审稿意见中提出的问题,可以考虑重投,否则还是改投为好。...

好吧,哎,碰到一个很轻率的审稿人。感觉他的第一印象很难改变。

发自小木虫IOS客户端
7楼2017-05-17 13:30:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 7 个回答

miss可人儿

新虫 (初入文坛)

3楼2017-05-17 11:52:24
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

goodlife2004

铜虫 (正式写手)

你自己想想能不能满足审稿人的要求,不能就改投

发自小木虫Android客户端
4楼2017-05-17 11:56:17
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

miss可人儿

新虫 (初入文坛)

引用回帖:
4楼: Originally posted by goodlife2004 at 2017-05-17 11:56:17
你自己想想能不能满足审稿人的要求,不能就改投

我觉得有一个审稿人满足不了,重投还会交给他审?

发自小木虫IOS客户端
5楼2017-05-17 11:59:01
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
不应助 确定回帖应助 (注意:应助才可能被奖励,但不允许灌水,必须填写15个字符以上)
信息提示
请填处理意见