24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 3320  |  回复: 9
【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题,作者风过无影2012将赠送您 15 个金币

风过无影2012

金虫 (小有名气)

[求助] Macromolecules被拒,申诉有意义吗? 已有1人参与

如题,6.11投稿,7.19被拒,两个审稿人,一个小修,一个拒稿(没有明确理由),具体如下:
Reviewer: 1

Recommendation: Reconsider after major revisions.

Comments:
This manuscript reports new epoxy (EP)-based molecular composites with sulfonated aromatic polyamides,poly(p-sulfophenylene terephthalamide) (sPPTA) and poly(benzidine-2,2'-disulfonic acid terephthamide) (PBDT), as the reinforcement, which disperse uniformly in epoxy, but do not show liquid crystalline structure. It is very interesting and the paper is well designed. The mechanical properties is significantly enhanced. However, before acceptance, minor revisions are needed.
1. Fig. 1. the legend is lost.
2. NMR is suggested to prove the reaction in the scheme 1,
3. The mechanical performances decreased when the sPPTA and the PBDT were more than 6%. Please explain the reason.
4. As the properties were decreasd when the the sPPTA and the PBDT were more than 6%, please give the SEM figure to explain this phenomenon.
5. The following paper can be referred to support your study;1) Composites Part B: Engineering, 2017, 114: 111-120.


Additional Questions:
Do these findings represent a significant advance in the polymer field?: Yes

Please rate the overall quality and clarity of the manuscript: Good

Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: Yes

Is the Supporting Information, if included, technically sound and sufficient to support the findings of the manuscript?: Yes

Would you like to bring this manuscript to the attention of the Editor as a particularly newsworthy or noteworthy manuscript?: Yes


Reviewer: 2

Recommendation: Do not publish. This manuscript is incremental in the field, and offers little if any value to the Macromolecules community

Comments:
Please consider another journal for your manuscript

Additional Questions:
Do these findings represent a significant advance in the polymer field?: No

Please rate the overall quality and clarity of the manuscript: Fair

Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: In part

Is the Supporting Information, if included, technically sound and sufficient to support the findings of the manuscript?: No

Would you like to bring this manuscript to the attention of the Editor as a particularly newsworthy or noteworthy manuscript?: No

考虑是申诉还是转投,希望有经验的朋友能给予一些意见,谢谢啦,临近申请季时间也比较紧,挺焦虑的。
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

yifeng11

至尊木虫 (知名作家)

感觉第二个审稿评论和第一个审稿人完全相反

发自小木虫Android客户端
2楼2018-07-22 20:54:30
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

匿名

本帖仅楼主可见
3楼2018-07-22 21:03:03
已阅   申请SEPI   回复此楼   编辑   查看我的主页

匿名

本帖仅楼主可见
4楼2018-07-22 21:08:03
已阅   申请SEPI   回复此楼   编辑   查看我的主页

匿名

本帖仅楼主可见
5楼2018-07-22 21:08:20
已阅   申请SEPI   回复此楼   编辑   查看我的主页

nono2009

超级版主 (文学泰斗)

No gains, no pains.

优秀区长优秀区长优秀区长优秀区长优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖

★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与,应助指数 +1
风过无影2012: 金币+5, 有帮助 2018-07-22 23:31:45
第一个是大修,第二个拒稿。这种情况下,编辑拒稿是很正常的,申诉意义不大。
6楼2018-07-22 21:25:46
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

太行松林

铁杆木虫 (职业作家)

7楼2018-07-22 22:09:21
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
8楼2018-07-22 22:52:21
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

dog432

银虫 (著名写手)

这种都是正常的拒稿,申诉有意义吗?

发自小木虫IOS客户端
科研前线
9楼2018-07-22 23:35:59
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mi_dilee

至尊木虫 (著名写手)

10楼2018-08-17 13:43:37
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 风过无影2012 的主题更新
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