±¾ÈËÊÇijһËù¹¤¿ÆѧУµÄÑо¿Éú£¬ÀÏ°å¸øÎҵĿÎÌâµÄÒ»²¿·ÖÊǹØÓÚÒ»ÖÖÇ°Ò©µÄÌåÄÚ·Ö²¼Ñо¿£¬»¨Á˺ܳ¤Ê±¼äѧ»áÁ˶¯ÎïʵÑéÒÔ¼°ÒÇÆ÷·ÖÎö£¬ÓÖ»¨ÁË2¸öÔÂдÁËƪӢÎÄÎÄÕ£¬Í¶³öÈ¥ÁË£¬ÔÓÖ¾¾ÍÊÇChromatographia¡££¨¸Ð¾õÔÚÕâ¸öÁìÓòÀïÕâ¸öÔÓÖ¾»¹ÐУ©¡£±¾ß°¡10Ìì¾Í±»¾Ü¾øÁË£¬±à¼¾ÜµÄ£¡£¡£¡ÉËÐÄ£¡
Dear xxxxxxxxxxx,
I am referring to your above work for which we now have received the Scientific Editor's decision.
After a close study of your manuscript, our Scientific Editor responsible for your submission has decided against publication as this paper describes a routine pharmacological study on a frequently reported analyte. It lacks the chromatographic novelty needed for publication in Chromatographia.
As outlined in two recent editorials (Chromatographia 67, 9/10, 2008, and 69, 11/12, 2009), incremental advances and routine applications of standard methods are not acceptable for publication unless there is advance in the understanding of the chromatographic technique. The policy of the journal has changed in recent months and a higher level of novelty in the proposed method is now required.
I regret the negative reply and look forward to another opportunity of cooperating with you. Thank you for your interest in Chromatographia.
With kind regards from Wiesbaden and,
sincerely yours
Birgit Borstelmann
Editorial Office Chromatographia
Âé·³¿ÉÓÐÕâ¸öÁìÓòµÄ´ó¸ç¸øµãÖ¸µã°É£¬Ò»¸ö¹¤¿ÆѧÉú×öÕâ¸öºÜ²»ÈÝÒ×°¡£¡£¡£¡Ð»Ð»°¡ |