24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 1983  |  回复: 5
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

lishihuihao

金虫 (小有名气)

[求助] 投稿退修已4个月了,应不应该撤,请求高人指点!

我于去年12 月投稿,今年1月编辑回信如下:
Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in Energy & Fuels. It has been examined by expert reviewers whose reviews are enclosed. The reviewers have expressed serious reservations about this work that I don’t believe could be addressed through a standard major revision. In light of the comments received, I am unable toaccept the manuscript for publication in Energy & Fuels. I am particularly concerned about the issues of clarity and novelty, which may be connected: perhaps the novelty of your work was just not explained well enough for the reviewers to understand.
If further experimentation, analysis, and revisions allow you to address the referees concerns in full we would be happy to consider a revised manuscript as a new submission. Please refer to the Manuscript ID above and include a detailed list of the changes you make when you submit the new manuscript. Your revision is due within 6 months.
根据审稿人的建议修改后,前几天重新提交,今天又收到如下来信:
Thank you for submitting your manuscript for publication in Energy & Fuels. I understand from my preliminary reading that you addressed some of the reviewer comments on the earlier version of this manuscript. However, before I can send the manuscript out for review I must ask you to revise it to address two points that our policies now require of all contributions in this topical area.
First, I must ask you, again, to report the conversion data as reaction rates, normalized by the number of ostensible catalytic sites (i.e., as turnover rates). Preferably, the kinetics results would be captured as rate equations in which the Arrhenius parameters (normalized pre-exponential factor, apparent activation energy) could be compared with those expected from the likely rate determining step and with those obtained in other laboratories.
Second, especially because you have studied catalysts with varying pore dimensions, I must ask you to present evidence that the reaction rates have not been influenced by the rates of internal mass transport. A Koros-Nowak or Madon-Boudart test would suffice. Those tests will require that you prepare samples in which the loading of the metal is varied, at constant metal dispersion, and then demonstrating that the normalized rate of reaction does not change with metal loading.
You will understand that we are striving to archive results that can be readily compared across laboratories and that bear on the underlying molecular phenomena.
In addition, I can suggest that the reviewers and readers would be interested in knowing whether the catalysts behave the same when exposed to the same concentrations of methane, carbon dioxide and products when the temperature of the catalyst is controlled externally.
I am formally rejecting this manuscript to give you the opportunity to make those changes. If you continue to consider that Energy & Fuels can provide your work with an attentive audience, then, when further experimentation, analysis, and revisions allow you to address those concerns in full, we would be happy to consider a revised manuscript as a new submission. Please refer to the Manuscript ID above and include a detailed list of the changes you make when you submit the new manuscript so we can process it rapidly.
第一次退修,只有审稿人的修改意见,编辑并没有提出他自己的建议。第二次退修,编辑让补充动力学实验,否则不给送审。我提交的是关于催化剂表征及助剂对反应活性影响比较方面的内容,审稿人也没有提动力学,对编辑的要求我该怎么办?补动力学实验很费时间, 结果也不一定理想,我是不是该撤稿另投?迷茫中,我已耽误了4个月,再重投还有多大希望,再被拒的话,时间就白白晃过去了
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

leimiao_hit

木虫之王 (文学泰斗)

小元

文献杰出贡献

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
如果编辑要求补做的实验难度不大的话,果断补充啊
..........回首向来萧瑟处,归去,也无风雨也无晴...........
5楼2012-04-06 00:26:11
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 6 个回答

seapass

至尊木虫 (职业作家)

超哥

优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖


感谢参与,应助指数 +1
lishihuihao: 金币+1, 有帮助 2012-04-06 19:11:33
催稿,不要撤稿,不划算,先问问。
独上高楼。。。
2楼2012-04-05 22:07:55
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

sally208

专家顾问 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖


感谢参与,应助指数 +1
lishihuihao: 金币+1, ★★★很有帮助 2012-04-06 19:12:27
编辑其实是最重要的审稿人,尤其是一个小方向的专业期刊。如果编辑要求补做的实验难度不大的话,建议修后冲突,毕竟对你提高该工作的质量是大有益处的。
3楼2012-04-05 23:05:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

hq_angel

铁杆木虫 (职业作家)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
如果实验没什么问题,还是按编辑要求补做。
三人行必有我师
4楼2012-04-05 23:39:36
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[基金申请] 投票:  有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的? +16 爱看书的可乐 2026-08-26 18/900 2026-08-28 15:41 by winsaint
[基金申请] 有没有仍没收到信息的 +3 德尚中行 2026-08-27 3/150 2026-08-28 15:24 by rongshuxia
[教师之家] 导师吐槽:我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生! +8 苏东坡二世 2026-08-23 8/400 2026-08-28 14:41 by lkforward
[基金申请] 基金不中,共勉 +11 eulota 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-28 14:22 by 火星超人xi
[基金申请] 麻烦专家们看看评委们的意见(F口面上) +4 gdd2018 2026-08-28 9/450 2026-08-28 14:22 by jklily
[基金申请] 基金系统什么内容也没有 30+4 winsaint 2026-08-27 9/450 2026-08-28 11:06 by maolC
[基金申请] 为什么资助数各大高校都创新高,自己申请怎么就这么难 +10 Kittylucky 2026-08-27 11/550 2026-08-28 10:45 by Kittylucky
[基金申请] 哪位高人中了,把查询到的截图贴出来让我看看,让我长长见识 +5 yuleib84 2026-08-26 6/300 2026-08-28 00:02 by yudaoqian88
[基金申请] 面上合作单位盖章 +5 ssyjh 2026-08-27 5/250 2026-08-27 20:50 by gdfollow
[文学芳草园] 梦想 +3 myrtle 2026-08-26 3/150 2026-08-27 10:01 by angelyueyi
[基金申请] 2026年的国家社科基金项目通讯评审的新规则与新动向、新挑战 +7 process2012 2026-08-23 10/500 2026-08-26 19:23 by hmhminy
[基金申请] 范进中举一文的中心思想 +9 炎黄贵胄 2026-08-22 10/500 2026-08-26 15:40 by semaglutide
[基金申请] 2026国自然函评费到账 +22 羊腰板 2026-08-21 25/1250 2026-08-26 15:00 by zuocuiping
[基金申请] 2026年8月25日国自然放榜前突然收到列入评审专家邮件,有关系吗? +25 木水思豆 2026-08-25 28/1400 2026-08-26 14:53 by draco1987
[基金申请] 能否退出参与的面上项目解除限项 +23 koalala 2026-08-24 26/1300 2026-08-26 14:29 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 出来了 +9 trojank 2026-08-26 9/450 2026-08-26 14:25 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 国际合作可查了,中了面上 (EPI+1)(金币+50) +18 Ldrop2023 2026-08-26 18/900 2026-08-26 11:15 by cmrandy
[基金申请] 今天务委会开完了,明天出结果吗 +19 angus9576 2026-08-25 23/1150 2026-08-26 10:03 by zp519
[基金申请] 明天应该可查了!? +6 chengyan1220 2026-08-23 6/300 2026-08-25 19:45 by zfd97
[教师之家] 跳槽后在研项目怎么办? +5 简单化xn 2026-08-22 10/500 2026-08-23 12:38 by 简单化xn
信息提示
请填处理意见