| 查看: 1905 | 回复: 8 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
[交流]
审稿意见回来了，可是不知道接受的可能性，请大家帮忙看看已有8人参与
|
|||
|
我初次投稿外文，好不容易等来审稿意见，可是不太好。请大家帮忙看看，应该好好修改呢？还是另寻出路？ The five reviews for your manuscript are attached. The reviewers have raised points that require significant consideration and revision of the manuscript before it is suitable for publication. However, with adequate response and revision, the manuscript may be acceptable for publication in Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. Please give careful consideration to the reviewers’ comments and revise the manuscript as may be appropriate. The revised manuscript will be returned to the reviewers for further comments. We would like to receive your revision as soon as possible, 90 days at the latest. Reviewer: 1 Comments to the Author The language of the paper must, however, be improved. I therefore suggest that the author send the paper to someone with specific competence on how to improve the language of scientific papers.（具体意见省略）If the authors address the above questions I am willing to read the manuscript again in detail to improve its quality. Reviewer: 2 Comments to the Author The clarity of presentation should be improved and spelling mistakes should be checked and corrected. In this paper the authors presented a novel functional tannins-immobilized chitosan resin (TICR). Absorption of BSA on TICR has been investigated by varying contact time and protein initial concentration. In addition adsorption behaviour was discussed according to Langmuir model. The manuscript presents an interesting and innovative way to fabricate low-cost material for protein removal from aqueous solutions. The technical quality of this manuscript is acceptable but need to be extended. Reviewer: 3 This paper is not ready for publication. It does not have a useful message, important features are overlooked, the experiments make little sense and important physical principles are confused. Reviewer: 4 This article presents a “novel functional tannins-immobilized chitosan resin (TICR)” which has potential applications in the removal of proteins from solution. The concept is illustrated with BSA. Although it is known that chitosan is a suitable material for the adsorption of proteins such as BSA, the main premise (novelty) for this manuscript is based on the improved protein uptake when chitosan is modified with tannins. Although this is a logical expectation based on the phenolic groups in tannins and the basic nature of proteins, the authors need to provide an adequate comparison between the unmodified resin (CR) and the tannins modified counterpart (TICR) in order to justify the proposed novel resin. In this comparison, one would expect that the TICR is superior to the CR. Also, it would be very useful if the authors compare their novel TICR material to existing systems such as tannins immobilized on other supports such as carbon black in terms of ability to remove proteins (e.g., BSA). Reviewer: 5 The work presented in this paper deals with the protein adsorption properties of tannins-immobilized chitosan resin. The removal of proteins from various media is a process of great economical importance. The topic seems to be within the scope of Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. But the submitted article does not report any significant innovative research. I have not been convinced by the study of BSA adsorption. The authors seem not very familiar with this topic. The pH of adsorption is not controlled and not given. However it is one of the most important parameter to control in protein adsorption. Among the 30 references in the cited literature, only one is related to protein adsorption (ref. 27). There are about 2000 articles published each year on protein adsorption. I am sure that if the authors take the time to read some of them, they will realize that the adsorption of proteins is a much more complex phenomenon than the adsorption of Fe(II) and Fe(III) ions, which they take as example to discuss their results (ref. 20, cited line 127). 拜托大家多给意见！ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
刚当完兵回来想考研
已经有26人回复
-
恳请大家帮我看看如何提高
已经有7人回复
-
我劝基金委要善良+一个大胆的设想
已经有12人回复
-
2024上会名单已出
已经有5人回复
-
出结果了
已经有22人回复
-
蹲! 希望今天能有大红奖状
已经有10人回复
-
2024年度国家资助博士后研究人员计划（B、C 档）也不知道什么时候出
已经有14人回复
-
过柱子，产品，杂质在是 pe:ea=100:1 也一起出来？
已经有6人回复
-
对象没有，还非常想读博，难以抉择
已经有57人回复
-
蹲CSC结果，会延迟到七月初吗？
已经有6人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 急，请大家帮忙看看这个审稿意见，困惑.......
已经有13人回复
- 请各位帮忙看以下审稿意见，不知道如何修改！
已经有3人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，帮忙看看这个评审意见？
已经有7人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看这个审稿意见（不太明白审稿人有没有提出修改意见）
已经有7人回复
- 投稿有答复了，些许激动请大家帮忙看看，谢谢大家！（在13楼增加第二封审稿意见）
已经有32人回复
- 物理学报审稿意见，请大家帮忙看看录用几率多大？修改有哪些注意事项，谢谢了
已经有24人回复
- 专家审稿意见，请大家帮忙分析！
已经有5人回复
- 审稿意见返回，大家帮忙看看可以改后重投么？
已经有11人回复
- 审稿意见回来了，大家帮忙看一下。。
已经有9人回复
- 文章的审稿意见，大家帮忙看看！
已经有6人回复
- 审稿意见，第一次投稿不知道还有没有戏？大家帮助看看，导师不管，没有人问
已经有4人回复
- 有一个审稿人的意见，很郁闷，不知道怎么回，大家来帮帮忙啊！
已经有14人回复
- 请大家帮忙看看如何回复审稿意见
已经有4人回复
- 文章审稿意见回来了，请虫子们帮忙看看意见是正面的还是负面的？
已经有20人回复
- 论文一审回来了，有一些审稿意见，请大家帮我看看是什么意思。
已经有5人回复
- 大家帮我看看审稿人的意见，需要大修，不知道希望大不
已经有4人回复
- 审稿意见回来，一个审稿人让据，编辑说大修，大家帮我看看希望大不
已经有24人回复
★
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
小木虫(金币+0.5):给个红包，谢谢回帖交流
|
However, with adequate response and revision, the manuscript may be acceptable for publication in Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. 本文来自: 小木虫论坛 http://muchong.com/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=2580328 这句话说明了。 |
6楼2010-11-11 09:33:31
1