24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

aqzxzx

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 51.5
红花: 1
帖子: 10
在线: 6.2小时
虫号: 226170
注册: 2006-03-23
专业: 抗肿瘤药物药理

[交流] [求助]如何处理这样的审稿意见：The study is descriptive in nature已有8人参与

2月底投了一篇文章到JBC，审稿很快，半个月就给出审稿结果了，可是令人很纠结，编辑并没有拒掉，而是希望改后重投（declined and resubmitted）。我仔细看了两个审稿人的意见，第二个审稿人的意见比较具体，而且大多是写作方面的，还比较能够针对性地修改；但第一个审稿人就只有一句话The study while interesting is descriptive in nature.让人很是抓狂

。由于编辑已告知再投时需要在cover letter中详细说明针对审稿人提出的意见的修改情况，现在不知道该如何对这样的审稿意见做出回复，恳请高人给出意见。

下面附上审稿信原文：

Your manuscript has been reviewed by the Editorial Board.
Unfortunately, the decision was made to decline the manuscript in its current
form. One reviewer indicates that the study is too descriptive and the other
finds numerous items that need attention. If you can address the issues raised,
I would be willing to consider a revised paper. Note that no guarantee of
acceptance of the revised manuscript is implied.

Reviewer 1
COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHOR:
The study while interesting is descriptive in nature.

Reviewer 2
COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHOR:
Manuscript No: JBC/2012/356428

Comments to the authors:
The manuscript reports that YCP selectively promotes the
activation of B cells through Toll-like receptor 2 and Toll-like receptor 4. The
authors presented experimental evidence to show that YCP binds to TLR2 and TLR4
of B cell, activates a serial events of signaling pathways including p38, ERK,
JNK, and NF-κB , which eventually leads to the activation of B cell as indicated
by proliferation and IgM production. The experiments are designed reasonable and
well down, the findings are significant.

The manuscript needs revision:
1. It seems to me that the “EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES” part is too wordy.
2. I recommend authors to re-write the ELISA-paragraph.
3. In the figure 2-A, each panel should also includes the same field panel with
normal light observation to show all the cells in the field.
4. Let the editor to decide if the figure 6 is necessary, or in other words, if
there is enough information to construct the signaling pathway?
5. English language should be checked carefully for accurate and unambiguous
expressions.

回复此楼

1楼2012-03-14 15:21:57

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

Luckyman2012

木虫 (知名作家)

应助: 392 (硕士)
贵宾: 2.047
金币: 2374.2
散金: 14033
红花: 49
沙发: 106
帖子: 9318
在线: 512.3小时
虫号: 1606693
注册: 2012-02-08
性别: GG
专业: 矿物工程与物质分离科学

★
小木虫(金币+0.5): 给个红包，谢谢回帖

根据综合意见中的One reviewer indicates that the study is too descriptive 这句话，我理解审稿人是说你的论文叙述性太强，也许意思是分析不够细致到位吧。

修改后可以回复说相应的文章内容做了修改，使得整篇论文分析更全面、结论更明确。

我感觉这样，没有别的好办法。再咨询下别人吧。

赞一下

回复此楼

走别人的路，让自己去说吧……

2楼2012-03-14 15:43:44

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖

aqzxzx

新虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 51.5
红花: 1
帖子: 10
在线: 6.2小时
虫号: 226170
注册: 2006-03-23
专业: 抗肿瘤药物药理

引用回帖:

2楼: Originally posted by Luckyman2012 at 2012-03-14 15:43:44:
根据综合意见中的One reviewer indicates that the study is too descriptive 这句话，我理解审稿人是说你的论文叙述性太强，也许意思是分析不够细致到位吧。

修改后可以回复说相应的文章内容做了修改，使得整 ...

谢谢Luckyman2012的回复，继续坐等建议……

赞一下

回复此楼

3楼2012-03-14 16:00:21

已阅回复此楼关注TA 给TA发消息送TA红花 TA的回帖