| 查看: 585 | 回复: 2 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
leili木虫 (正式写手)
|
[交流]
求评价很高的审稿人意见（英文）！
|
||
|
本人想求一些关于“直接接收”，正面评价很高，SCI审稿人的comments。 那位手头有这方面的模板……（英文） 谢谢大家哈  |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
Suzuki偶联中硼酸酯原料掉下的硼酸酯是否可以自身偶联，生成B2Pin2杂质
已经有3人回复
-
2026年面上项目中了，2A+B, 会评顺利通过
已经有11人回复
-
大龄残疾硕士的一点执念
已经有19人回复
-
今年E04面上
已经有19人回复
-
刑法学论文投稿求助
已经有5人回复
-
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering
已经有3人回复
-
最后一年，祈求好运
已经有3人回复
-
风电环氧领域
已经有3人回复
-
售T0P一区SCI文章，我:8O5.51.O.54,科目齐全,可＋急
已经有4人回复
-
植酸TLC薄层色谱爬板
已经有6人回复
★
leili(金币+1,VIP+0):谢谢分享！ 1-9 20:34
leili(金币+1,VIP+0):谢谢分享！ 1-9 20:34
|
ok ! 哥帖一份哥以前收到的审稿意见，希望对楼主有用： Reviewer: 3 Comments to the Author The authors reported some evidence supporting the onset of apoptosis in postmortem muscle based on characteristic feature of this cell death process including structural changes affecting cell nuclei, DNA fragmentation using the TUNNEL method and caspase 3 activity measurement at different sampling time. This was done on three bovine muscles including Longissimus dorsi (LD), Semitendinosus (ST) and Psoas minor (PM). With reference to the changes affecting the considered modification, they concluded that, in all muscles studied, apoptosis was set up although at different rates and to a variable extent. The paper is correctly written and the discussion interesting. Major comments In muscle tissue, DNA fragmentation is seldom observed except under severe pathological conditions, which is not the case here. In addition, the nuclei labeled in green in Figure 2 often overlapped the laminin labeling. I am wondering whether these nuclei are those of mononucleated cells located in the extracellular matrix such as fibroblasts or really myofiber nuclei? A higher light microscope magnification will be needed to verify. This will not however change the conclusions since, if DNA of monucleated cell nuclei is fragmented, this would mean that apoptosis is going on in the tissue. Could the authors provide a higher magnification view of the picture? Minor comments The authors indicate the full name of the muscles selected only in the abstract. Why this was not done in section 2.1? In addition, it is probably not Psoas Minor but Psoas Major, isn’t it? In section 2.1 or at the beginning section 3, the authors must justify the muscle choice made. Page 6, lines 91-93: the sentence is difficult to understand, please rephrase it. Page 7, line 97: indicate the different sampling time selected Page 9, line 157: Write “structurally intact” instead of “structural intact”. |
2楼2010-01-09 19:59:05
★
leili(金币+1,VIP+0):再次表示感谢！ 1-9 20:51
leili(金币+1,VIP+0):再次表示感谢！ 1-9 20:51
|
Reviewer #1: In my opinion the work presented in the manuscript should be accepted for publication once the following points have been addressed. Line 17- 19. State the level of significance. Line 38. The authors do need to indicate that these proteins are substrates for calpains too. Remove the word "special" as it is not required. Line 42 to 43. Remove the word undoubtedly as there is debate whether this is the case. I think the reference cited suggested that caspases could be involved at this level but did not present direct evidence. |
3楼2010-01-09 20:01:15