24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

lijun585429

铜虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 342.5
红花: 1
帖子: 48
在线: 29.8小时
虫号: 1291796
注册: 2011-05-10
性别: GG
专业: 口腔颅颌面组织生长发育及

[求助] 文章大修，审稿人问题比较尖锐已有15人参与

第一次投英文文章，投稿后一个月收到编辑的回复了，建议大修。一共找了两个审稿人，第一个意见比较尖锐不建议接收；第二个比较nice一些，提了6个问题，但是都是比较positive的，一些建议什么的。另附上reviewer1的意见大家帮忙分析一下该如何回复，非常感谢了。

Reviewer #1: General comments

This study investigated “文章标题...." 。As the results, hPDLCs conditioned by” 一种物质“ demonstrated a significant increase in proliferation and also showed an increased formation of mineralized matrix nodules and increased ALP activity with the attendant expression of Runx2. Based on these findings, the authors suggested that ”一种物质“ induces proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of hPDLCs, indicating that”一种物质“ may be applicable as a novel autologous graft in periodontal tissue engineering regeneration. The aims of this study are clear and the results obtained are interesting. However, the current findings appeared to quite preliminary data. Without the data showing the possible mechanisms by which”一种物质“ stimulated proliferation and osteoblast differentiation of hPDLCs, it can't be further considerable for acceptance.

Specific comments
First of all, there was no a study to verify the mechanisms involved in the ”一种物质“-mediated increases in proliferation and differentiation of the cells. It is strongly recommended to show why the blood samples did so in the hPDLCs. Especially, to end this, the authors have to try to check cell cycle progression using flow cytometer and then to analyze what are the regulatory factors such as CDKs and/or cyclins are involved therein by Western blot analysis. In addition, the authors showed the expression pattern of Runx2 as an osteogenic marker. Of course, this factor might be one of the most important osteogenic factors. However, it will be needed to show that which of the signaling molecules are closely associated with the induction of Runx2 as a second messenger by treating the cells with the blood samples. With these additional experiments, the authors are also capable of explaining the reason why the ”一种物质“ among the samples showed the most prominent activities.

Minor comments
1.       The figures 2 and 3 are not necessary in this manuscript, rather it is recommended to show as a supplemental figure.
2.       Please check carefully misspelling (ex, HPDLCs -> hPDLCs) and grammatical errors.
3.       The length of several sentences shown in the highlights appeared to be over a general limitation. Please check this with consideration of the Journal Policy.

总结起来，这位reviewer的意见就是集中在该文章未做机制方面的研究。事实上我也确实没有再对此深入下去，这方面的文章很少做到机制层面上的，因为该物质成分比较复杂，硕士期间也没能力在这方面深入下去，不过我以后倒是有这方面的想法。我也知道自己文章比较浅显所以才投的这个杂志(IF=1.5)，如果做到机制方面的话，肯定会投3分以上的文章了。  现在不知道如何回复这个reviewer，编辑给我修回的时间是4周，时间紧迫，另外我现在工作了没有那么多时间去补实验了。好无助啊，有些想放弃了。

回复此楼