| 查看: 4452 | 回复: 127 | |||
| 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]
文章被接受散金币，还有句话不太明白，求助一下
|
|||
|
前面是文章被接受了，这句ps的没懂，是要再写个摘要吗？信里也没写什么时候能发表，让我交稿费什么的，是要继续等还是怎么问问呢？ PS PLEASE WILL YOU SEND US A 6-LINE (OR SO) NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY FOR INCLUSION IN OUR BETWEEN-THE-COVERS SECTION. [ Last edited by seapass on 2012-4-5 at 00:11 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
OpenAI又攻克数学难题了，离AI做有机合成还有多远？
已经有12人回复
-
极限拉扯，如何抉择
已经有13人回复
-
课题组会帮你通过考核么？
已经有7人回复
-
入职后第一次管课题组的专利缴费，对账才发现官费比别人多掏了一倍
已经有6人回复
-
售一区SCI文章T0P，我:8O.551.O54,科目全,可十急
已经有9人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有8人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8O5.5.1.O5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有10人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有9人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有7人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有10人回复
★
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包，谢谢回帖
|
P.S. If you use the services of a professional paper writing agency to have your paper written to a higher standard, we would be prepared to consider a new paper from you on this topic. Please also ensure that your revised paper conforms to the advice given in our Instructions to Authors and Guidance Notes (downloadable from our website). COMMENTS x Overall presentation unsatisfactory; REVIEWER COMMENTS FOR THE AUTHOR: Reviewer #1: BILE3838 FKB induces NSCLC H460 cells apoptosis by adjusting ratio of Bax/Bcl-xl and activating JNK The mechanism of apoptosis induced by flavokawain B has been studied with many cell lines. In this manuscript, An J. et al presented their result with lung cancer cell (H460) and found the partially different mechanism to that one published by the same group (Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2011). Overall, the experiment was designed extensively and reasonably. The result is interesting but there are some concerns I really hope authors could address them well: Major: 1. The language was poorly organized. The authors are therefore urged to use the services of a professional paper writing agency to have their paper written to the required standard. 2. Some data were confusingly presented, especially figure 2B and 2C. The figures are conflicted with legends. Minor: 1. The full name of FKB should be mentioned at the very beginning of this paper (title and abstract). 2. For figure 1, why there was increase of cell viability with low dose of FKB? 3. For figure 2B, the result of western blotting should be mentioned clearly that it is the cyt C in cytosol. The result of mitochondrial cyt C should also be done and presented together. 4. For figure 2C, it should be pCDNA3.1, not "pDNA3.1". and it need to be described well how authors cloned the construct with survivin. 5. For figure 3A, authors should give the information of Bik antibody. Authors did not mention any information of this antibody. I don't think they can get such good signal with anti-Bik antibodies from Cell Signaling. Since the change of Bcl-xL is one of main points of their result, authors should re-do this experiment. With antibody from Cell Signaling, it should be two bands. And it does exist in cell with two isoforms. In the legend of figure 3a, it should be Bcl-2 family, not "Bcl family". 6. In the second part of result. Since both XIAP and Survivin were decreased dramatically after treatment, why author select survivin only to do the study further. The English and grammar is unacceptable in the manuscript and requires a major re-write. The figures are poorly presented and make reviewing the data difficult. There is little novelty or this is not clear from the results compared to previous studies from the same group. 麻烦大家也帮我看下吧。小硕第一次写，是怎么回事呢？ |
119楼2012-04-05 09:35:54
2楼2012-04-04 10:51:25
4楼2012-04-04 10:52:56
6楼2012-04-04 10:53:52
简单回复
wgs81363楼
2012-04-04 10:51
回复
annafeifei(金币+1): 谢谢参与
