| ²é¿´: 564 | »Ø¸´: 2 | |||
| µ±Ç°Ö÷ÌâÒѾ´æµµ¡£ | |||
leiliľ³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
|
[½»Á÷]
ÇóÆÀ¼ÛºÜ¸ßµÄÉó¸åÈËÒâ¼û£¨Ó¢ÎÄ£©£¡
|
||
|
±¾ÈËÏëÇóһЩ¹ØÓÚ¡°Ö±½Ó½ÓÊÕ¡±£¬ÕýÃæÆÀ¼ÛºÜ¸ß£¬SCIÉó¸åÈ˵Äcomments¡£ ÄÇλÊÖÍ·ÓÐÕâ·½ÃæµÄÄ£°å¡¡£¨Ó¢ÎÄ£© лл´ó¼Ò¹þ |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸211£¬»¯Ñ§Ñ§Ë¶£¬310·Ö£¬±¾¿ÆÖصãË«·Ç£¬Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸211£¬»¯Ñ§Ñ§Ë¶£¬310·Ö£¬±¾¿ÆÖصãË«·Ç£¬Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ17È˻ظ´
070300»¯Ñ§Ñ§Ë¶311·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ15È˻ظ´
²ÄÁϵ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤×¨Ë¶306·ÖÕÒºÏÊʵ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
»¯Ñ§¹¤³Ìµ÷¼Á289
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
»¯¹¤Ñ§Ë¶ 285Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ22È˻ظ´
298Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
368»¯Ñ§Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
326Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
meizhou
ľ³æ (ÖªÃû×÷¼Ò)
³ÁÄ«ÓÚÐÄ£¬²»Ã»ÓÚÎï
- Ó¦Öú: 14 (СѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.1
- ½ð±Ò: 1832
- É¢½ð: 717
- ºì»¨: 13
- Ìû×Ó: 6386
- ÔÚÏß: 504.1Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 69921
- ×¢²á: 2005-05-24
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ʳƷ¿ÆÑ§»ù´¡
¡ï
leili(½ð±Ò+1,VIP+0):лл·ÖÏí£¡ 1-9 20:34
leili(½ð±Ò+1,VIP+0):лл·ÖÏí£¡ 1-9 20:34
|
ok ! ¸çÌûÒ»·Ý¸çÒÔǰÊÕµ½µÄÉó¸åÒâ¼û£¬Ï£Íû¶ÔÂ¥Ö÷ÓÐÓ㺠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¡±. |

2Â¥2010-01-09 19:59:05
meizhou
ľ³æ (ÖªÃû×÷¼Ò)
³ÁÄ«ÓÚÐÄ£¬²»Ã»ÓÚÎï
- Ó¦Öú: 14 (СѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.1
- ½ð±Ò: 1832
- É¢½ð: 717
- ºì»¨: 13
- Ìû×Ó: 6386
- ÔÚÏß: 504.1Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 69921
- ×¢²á: 2005-05-24
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ʳƷ¿ÆÑ§»ù´¡
¡ï
leili(½ð±Ò+1,VIP+0):Ôٴαíʾ¸Ðл£¡ 1-9 20:51
leili(½ð±Ò+1,VIP+0):Ôٴαíʾ¸Ðл£¡ 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. |

3Â¥2010-01-09 20:01:15














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥