| 查看: 4246 | 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
哪位老哥知道今年的国自然具体哪一天放榜？
已经有6人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有6人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有7人回复
-
售SCI-T0P文章，我:8O.5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有5人回复
-
欢迎发来filecode的Mz6后的代码验证其规律
已经有50人回复
-
filecode
已经有11人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O.5.5.1O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有5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5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4人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:
-
祝福！基金中中中！！！！
+1/422
-
北京信息科技大学机电工程学院硕士研究生招生线上宣讲会-8月16日
+5/260
-
2026年生物学、大数据与信息工程国际会议 (BSBIE 2026)
+1/244
-
中国科学院空天院精密干涉测量团队 精密机械结构工程师招聘启事
+1/83
-
北京信息科技大学机电工程学院硕士研究生招生线上宣讲会——8月16日
+1/81
-
中国科学院空天院精密干涉测量团队招聘光学/算法/机械方向博士后/特别研究助理
+1/81
-
广东医科大学博士后招聘-基础医学，生信等方向
+1/38
-
天津大学环境学院童银栋教授招收博士后（生源要素循环/温室效应/新污染物方向）
+1/30
-
中国科学院生态环境研究中心环境工程相关方向招收保送硕士和联合培养博士和硕士研究生
+1/6
-
北理工集成电路杰青团队 | 诚招科助理
+1/4
-
UTS 招收2027年入学博士生
+1/4
-
中山大学李国强课题组招收博士生（柔性电子方向）
+1/3
-
中山大学计算数学方向招2027届考核制博士生
+1/3
-
海南大学化学院-科研助理招聘 （可读博，可与华中科技大学，天津大学联培）+博后招聘
+1/3
-
北理工集成电路杰青团队 | 诚招科助理
+1/3
-
国家级人才团队诚聘生物信息相关专业的科研助理
+1/3
-
中国科学技术大学环境学院招聘招生
+1/2
-
中科院理化所热声热机团队招聘电气工程专业(电机方向)博士后/特别研究助理
+1/2
-
悉尼科技大学（QS 第87）数据科学/AI招收2027年秋季入学全奖及CSC博士生
+1/1
-
北京理工大学-集成电路与电子学院杰青团队-招博士后
+1/1
★
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
