| ²é¿´: 1196 | »Ø¸´: 20 | ||||
| µ±Ç°Ö÷ÌâÒѾ´æµµ¡£ | ||||
| µ±Ç°Ö»ÏÔʾÂú×ãÖ¸¶¨Ìõ¼þµÄ»ØÌû£¬µã»÷ÕâÀï²é¿´±¾»°ÌâµÄËùÓлØÌû | ||||
lx5865½ð³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
|
[½»Á÷]
Á½ÖÖ½ØÈ»²»Í¬µÄÉó¸åÒâ¼û£¬Ôõô°ì£¿
|
|||
Á½ÖÖ½ØÈ»²»Í¬µÄÉó¸åÒâ¼û£¬±à¼ÈÏΪ¡°Although the referees found this manuscript interesting and useful, a majority felt that this work is not suitable for publication in Chemistry Letter.¡±£¬µÚ¶þ¸öÉó¸åÈ˵ÄÒâ¼ûÖ»ÊÇÓÐÒ»µãµÀÀí£¬±à¼ÎªÊ²Ã´²»ÕÒµÚÈýÉó¸åÈË£¬»¹ÓÐÉê±çµÄ¿ÉÄÜÂð£¿![]() ![]() -------------------- Referee A Comment: -------------------- 1. Review Result: [1. Publish without change] 2. Rating (Importance of this manuscript) : [5] 3. Reviewer's Comments to the Author(s) (if any) : "This manuscript describes ¡Á¡Á¡Á¡Á¡Á, this manuscript will be acceptable for Chemistry Letter. Minor error (page 2, left column, 2 paragraph, 6 lines from bottom: ketoreducatases-----ketoreductases) -------------------- Referee B Comment: -------------------- 1. Review Result: [3. Not to be published in Chemistry Letter, because] The results do not meet the criteria of novelty required as a communication. 2. Rating (Importance of this manuscript) : [3] 3. Reviewer's Comments to the Author(s) (if any) : "This manuscript reports ¡Á¡Á¡Á¡Á¡Á. For these reasons, this manuscript should be rejected." |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
297£¬¹¤¿Æµ÷¼Á?ºÓÄÏũҵ´óѧ±¾¿Æ
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
245Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
ÉúÎïѧµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
È˹¤ÖÇÄÜ320µ÷¼Á08¹¤À໹Óлú»áÂð
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
105500ҩѧÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
274Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
ʳƷÓëÓªÑø£¨0955£©271Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
ת³¤Æ¸ÁË
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
ҩѧ305Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
26ҩѧר˶105500Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
¡ï
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
|
¿´ÔÓÖ¾ÁË ÓеÄÔÓÖ¾±È½Ï¸ºÔ𣬠¸øÄãÉêÊöµÄ»ú»á£¬ ÓеÄÖ±½Ó¾Ü¾ø£¬ ±Ï¾¹paper made in chinaÌ«¶àÁË£¬ È˼Ҳ»care |
3Â¥2009-09-19 10:45:15
midibb
ľ³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 1688.9
- Ìû×Ó: 744
- ÔÚÏß: 43·ÖÖÓ
- ³æºÅ: 419477
- ×¢²á: 2007-07-06
- רҵ: Äý¾Û̬ÎïÐÔ II £ºµç×ӽṹ
¡ï
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
¸çÃÇ£¬editorʲôÒâ¼û°¡¡£Èç¹ûÄã¾õµÃµÚ¶þ¸öÉó¸åÈË˵µÃûÓеÀÀí£¬Äã¾Íдmail¸øeditor,ÖðÌõ·´²µ°¡£¬×îºÃÄÜÒýÓÃЩÒѾ·¢±íÎÄÕµÄÀý×Ó£¬²»ÒªÅ¡£Ò»¶¨ÒªÈÃeditor¾õµÃÄãºÜÓеÀÀí£¬ÈÃËû¸Ðµ½µÚ¶þ¸öÉó¸åÈËˮƽ²»¹»£¬Ï¹ºöÓÆ¡£ÁíÍâÎÒ¾õµÃÄãµÃϸ¿´¿´editorµÃÒâ¼û£¬Õý³£Çé¿ö»áÕÒµÚÈý¸öÉó¸åÈË£¬¼´Ê¹ÕÒ²»µ½Ò²»áÓб༲¿²Ã¶¨µÃ£¬ËùÒÔÄãµÄ°Ñ±à¼²¿µÄÖÙ²ÃÒâ¼û×Ðϸ·ÖÎö·ÖÎö°¡ |
2Â¥2009-09-19 10:41:38
lx5865
½ð³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 729.4
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 125
- ÔÚÏß: 28.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 478100
- ×¢²á: 2007-12-14
- רҵ: ÂÌÉ«Óлú»¯Ñ§
|
±à¼µÄ?z¼ûÈçÏ£¬¾ÍÊÇj¾Ü¸å£¬»¹ÄÜ·´²µÂ𣿠Dear ¡Á¡Á¡Á Your manuscript has been reviewed with the aid of two independent referees whose reports are attached to this mail. Although the referees found this manuscript interesting and useful, a majority felt that this work is not suitable for publication in Chemistry Letter. We sincerely regret to inform you that it is not acceptable for publication in Chemistry Letters. Thank you for giving us an opportunity to review your work. We would gladly welcome any future submissions for consideration for publication in Chem. Lett. Sincerely yours, ¡Á¡Á¡Á |
4Â¥2009-09-19 10:48:43
sculhf
ÈÙÓþ°æÖ÷ (ÖªÃû×÷¼Ò)
¶ÏÒíÌìʹ
-

ר¼Ò¾Ñé: +1 - Ó¦Öú: 243 (´óѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 4.018
- ½ð±Ò: 43312.9
- É¢½ð: 1634
- ºì»¨: 64
- ɳ·¢: 16
- Ìû×Ó: 7676
- ÔÚÏß: 2007.8Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 497659
- ×¢²á: 2008-02-02
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Äý¾Û̬ÎïÐÔ II £ºµç×ӽṹ
- ¹ÜϽ: »ù½ðÉêÇë
¡ï
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
|
ºÜ¶àºÃÔÓÖ¾Ö»ÓÐÁ½¸öÆÀÉóÈ˶¼ÓÐÃ÷È·µÄÍÆ¼ö·¢±í ±à¼²ÅͬÒâÈÃÐÞ¸Ä ²»ÖªµÀ¶ÔÓÚÀÏÍâµÄÎÄÕÂÊDz»ÊÇÕâÑùµÄ¹æÔò!! ËùÒÔºÜÕý³£ ¼ÌÐøÅ¬Á¦ºÃºÃ¸Ä |

5Â¥2009-09-19 10:54:31















»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥
10