用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件
回复编辑邮件范文 英文
回复编辑邮件范文英文English:Thank you for reaching out regarding the editing request. I have carefully reviewed the document and made the necessary changes to ensure clarity, coherence, and consistency throughout. I focused on refining the language, restructuring sentences for better flow, and addressing any grammatical errors or inconsistencies. Additionally, I paid close attention to the overall tone and style to align with the intended audience and purpose of the document. Please find the revised version attached for your review. If you have any further questions or need additional revisions, please don't hesitate to letme know, and I'll be happy to assist further.中文翻译：感谢您就编辑请求与我联系。
我已经仔细审阅了文件，并进行了必要的修改，以确保整体清晰、连贯和一致。
我着重于优化语言、重组句子以获得更好的流畅性，并解决任何语法错误或不一致之处。
此外，我还密切关注了整体语调和风格，以与文件的预期受众和目的保持一致。
请查看附上的修订版，如果您有任何进一步的问题或需要额外的修改，请不要犹豫告诉我，我将很乐意提供进一步的帮助。
sci论文回复模板
如何在SCI修改稿中回答审稿人的意见，可能直接决定了这篇文章能否最终被录用，但是如何做好SCI修改稿的回复又是很多作者需要头疼的问题，以下是SCI修改稿中回答模板，作者可参考这个模板，做好SCI修改稿回复：ListofResponsesDearEditorsandReviewers:Thankyouforyourletterandforthereviewers’commentsconcerningourmanuscriptentitled “PaperTitle”(ID:文章稿号Wetriedourbesttoimprovethemanuscriptandmadesomechangesinthemanuscript.Thesechangeswil lnotinfluencethecontentandframeworkofthepaper.Andherewedidnotlistthechangesbutmarkedi nredinrevisedpaper.WeappreciateforEditors/Reviewers’warmworkearnestly,andhopethatthecorrectionwillmeetw ithapproval.Onceagain,thankyouverymuchforyourcommentsandsuggestions以下是审稿人意见和本人的回复。
与大家分享。
从中可以看出，这位审稿人认真读了文章，提出很多宝贵的意见。
这些意见分布在文章的各个地方。
我很诧异有人真正读了我的文章。
看到这些意见，我觉得很感激，不是因为接收文章的原因，而是这些意见能真正有助于提高文章的质量。
仅供个人学习参考从中还看出，回答审稿人问题的“技巧”。
对于回答问题，有的人就是一味反驳，却不加改进。
记得ACSStyleGuide里面说，当审稿人问到问题的，哪怕是他理解错误，这也说明作者这么写，其他读者也会理解错误，引起歧义。
SCI审稿意见回复模板来了
SCI审稿意见回复模板来了首先大家需要明确一点，给编辑的叫cover letter，不是response letter ，我们先来看下大致格式。
•Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of the manuscript “XXX” for publication in the Journal of YYY. We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper. We have incorporated most of the suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are highlighted in the manuscript. Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments and concerns. All page numbers refer to the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.•Ac cording to the reviewer’s comments, we have revised the manuscript extensively. If there are any other modifications we could make, we would like very much to modify them and wereally appreciate your help. We hope that our manuscript could be considered for publication in your journal. Thank you very much for your help.•Thank you again for your positive comments on our manuscript. 杂志名 is an influential journal which aims to improve our understanding of cancer prevention / other. From all the papers published in your journal, readers have been learning a lot. Hopefully, we could have our article been considered of publication in your journal. Should there been any other corrections we could make, please feel free to contact us.•Thank you for your email dated xxxxxx enclosing the reviewers’ comments. We have carefully reviewed the comments and have revised the manuscript accordingly. Our responses are given in a point-by-point manner below. Changes to the manuscript are shown in underline / red / bold.•I hope that the changes I’ve made resolve all your concerns about the article. I’m more than happy to make any further changes that will improve the paper and/or facilitate successful publication.•Based on these comments and suggestions, we have made careful modifications to the original manuscript, and carefully proof-read the manuscript to minimize typographical and grammatical errors. We believe that the manuscript has been greatly improved and hope it has reached your magazine’s standard.回到正题，给审稿人的意见回信，叫做Response to Reviewers。
SCI的coverletter催稿信修稿回复
一、最初投稿Cover letterDear Editors:We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled “Paper Title”, which we wish to be considered for publication in “Journal Name”. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and manuscript is approved by all authors for publication. I would like to declare on behalf of my co-authors that the work described was original research that has not been published previously, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere, in whole or in part. All the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed.In this work, we evaluated ……简要介绍一下论文的创新性. I hope this paper is suitable for “Journal Name”.The following is a list of possible reviewers for your consideration:1 Name A E-mail: ××××××××2 Name B E-mail: ××××××××We deeply appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers. If you have any queries, please don’t hesitate to contact me at the address below.Thank you and best regards.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××××××二、催稿信Dear Prof. ×××:Sorry for disturbing you. I am not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript titled “Paper Title”. ID: 文章稿号, although the status of “With Editor”has been lasting for more than two months, since submitted to journal three months ago. I am just wondering that my manuscript has been sent to reviewers or notI would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time check the status for us. I am very pleased to hear from you on the reviewer’s comments.Thank you very much for your consideration.Best regardsYours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××××××Dear Editor, I'm not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript which is submitted on Jun 24. The manuscript number is “SERREV-D-14-00023” and title is “Prediction and Structural Analysis of Impact Factor for Journ als Indexed in SCI: A Case Study of Nature”. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time check the status for me. With best regards Sincerely yoursSCI投稿---稿件状态咨询信四个范例范例一推荐：邮件标题：Inquire about the status of manuscript No: XXXX正文：Dear Editor,Sorry for disturbing you.I'm not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript titled "XXXX" ID: XXXX although the status of "QUEUED FOR REVIEW" for my manuscript have been lasting for XXXX months.I am just wondering that my manuscript has been send to reviewers or notI am very pleased to hear from you. Thank you very much for your consideration.Yours sincerely,XXXE-mail: xxxxxxx范例二：Dear Editor,It has been 4 months since we submitted our manuscriptID:je-2008-00649nto the journal office.I write this email to ask whether our paper has been accepted. And if is still being reviewed, when can I get the information of the final resultI would very much appreciate you if you could afford a little time to answer these question. Thank a lotXXXX范例三：Dear Editor,I'm the first author of the article No. submitted to your journal about 3 months ago. I'm sorry writing to you to ask about its review progress. Many thanks and looking forward for your replyBest wishesYours sincerely,范例四：Dear editor,Paper No.:Paper Title:We submitted the paper three months ago. Could you give us update information on the current status of our submission If there is anything that we can do, please let us know. Any information will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much for your time.Yours sincerelyXXXX三、修改稿Cover letterDear Dr/ Prof..写上负责你文章编辑的姓名,显得尊重,因为第一次的投稿不知道具体负责的编辑,只能用通用的Editors:On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructivecomments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Paper Title”. ID: 文章稿号.We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in red in the paper. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.Thank you and best regards.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××××××四、修改稿回答人的意见最重要的部分List of ResponsesDear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Title”ID: 文章稿号. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:Responds to the reviewer’s comments:Reviewer 1:1. Response to comment: ……简要列出意见……Response: ××××××2. Response to comment: ……简要列出意见……Response: ××××××;;;;;;逐条意见回答,切忌一定不能有遗漏针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用：We are very sorry for our negligence of ……...We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ……...It is really true as Reviewer suggested that……We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments.We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s suggestionAs Reviewer suggested that……Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we have ……最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见：Special thanks to you for your good comments.Reviewer 2:同上述Reviewer 3:××××××Other changes:1. Line 60-61, the statements of “……”were corrected as “…………”2. Line 107, “……”was added3. Line 129, “……”was deleted××××××We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript.These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.五、文章接受后可以考虑感谢一下负责你文章的编辑或主编根据需要Dear Prof. ××××××:Thanks very much for your kind work and consideration on publication of our paper. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.Thank you and best regards.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××××××六、询问校稿信件如果文章接受后时间较长Dear ×××:Sorry for disturbing you. I am not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of our accepted manuscript titled “Paper Title”ID: 文章稿号, since the copyright agreement for publication has been sent to you two months ago. I am just wondering that how long I can receive the proof of our manuscript from youI would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time for a reply. I am very pleased to hear from you.Thank you very much for your consideration.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××××××七、文章校稿信件Dear Mr. ×××:Thanks very much for your kind letter about the proof of our paper titled “Paper Title”ID: 文章稿号for publication in “Journal Name”. We have finished the proof reading and checking carefully, and some corrections about the proof and the answers to the queries are provided below.Corrections:1. In should be Page , Right column, line2. In the “”should be “”Page , Right column, lineAnswers for “author queries”:1. .2.3.We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know.Thank you and best regards.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××××××。
SCI审稿意见回复模板
精品文档List of ResponsesDear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds t o the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:Responds to the reviewer’s comments:Reviewer #1:1. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……)Response: ××××××2. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……)Response: ××××××......逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用：We are v ery sorry for our negligence of ……...We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ……...It is really true as Reviewer suggested that……We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments.We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s su ggestionAs Reviewer suggested that……Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we have ……最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见：Special thanks to you for your good comments.Reviewer #2:同上述Reviewer #3:××××××Other changes:1. Line 60-61, the statements of “……” were corrected as “…………”2. Line 107, “……” was added3. Line 129, “……” was deleted××××××We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions..。
用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件
用英文巧妙回复S C I期刊编辑信件Company number：【0089WT-8898YT-W8CCB-BUUT-202108】用英文巧妙回复S C I期刊编辑信件众所周知，外审专家对于文章的主要批评意见是非常重要的，因此作者对于这些意见的回复也是尤为关键。
本文就如何用英文就其意见进行回复做一下简单说明:1、In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that您的回复:外审专家对于表1中xxx所提出的问题现已改正。
而后面的一些小改动则不会影响文章对结果的解释。
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture inFigure 1 has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3，paragraph 1(line 3-8)and 2(line 6-11).These do not affect ourinterpretation of the result.2、我非常仔细地阅读了外审专家的意见，而且我认为文章仅仅因为缺少xxx而被拒绝刊登的。
我承认本应在丈中包含XXX 然后这仅是出于对文章简洁的考量，没有提供相关数据而非疏忽。
I have read thereferee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has beenrejected on the sole grounds that it lacked toxicity data. I admit that l did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done.This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3、谢谢您对于我文章“XXX”的回复以及外审专家的意见。
SCI文章英文回复
SCI文章英文回复暑假中了2篇SCI文章，影响因子都在IF=1.5-2.0之间。
其实，在此之前，本人已经发表了若干SCI，而且已经是两个期刊的Reviewer。
但尽管如此，随着文章积累越多，对SCI写作的认识也有所熟悉和深入。
下面谈谈一些体会，与大家分享。
第一篇：去年12月份投稿，7月份返回意见。
结论是：“I am pleased to inform you that your paper has been accepted for publication provided that you amend it according to the concerns raised in the review report given below.”实际上，这个结论已经非常好了。
我看了以下审稿意见，然后就逐条的进行了Response。
其中Response letter的格式我是参考了我审稿过的一篇德国学者的回复模式（我认为非常好）。
但是，在审稿意见中，有一条意见要我对实验过程做一描述。
我认为完全没有必要，所以没有改此项。
很快，R1版文件被主编审回。
我认为应该“Complete Accept”了，但意见还是“I am pleased to inform you that your paper has been accepted for publication provided that you amend it according to the concerns raised in the review report given below.”不出所料，主编的意见就是R1中没有改的那条，而且比较客气，认为“Probably the authors did not notice this requirement. Howev er, this issue is critical: to judge the value of the reported methodological development;”没有办法，我又认真对意见进行了修改。
sci审稿意见回复范文
论文题目：Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies on the antivirus effects of A (一种中草药) against virus B （一种病毒）所投杂志：Life Sciences投稿结果：这次大修后又经过一次小修，被接受发表编辑信内容（注：有删节）：Dear Mr. XXX,Your manuscript has been examined by the editors and qualified referee . We think the manuscript has merit but requires revision before we can accept it for publication in the Journal. Careful consideration must be given to the points raised in the reviewer comments, which are enclosed below.If you choose to submit a revision of your manuscript, please incorporate responses to the reviewer comments into the revised paper.A complete rebuttal with no manuscript alterations is usually considered inadequate and may result in lengthy re-review procedures.A letter detailing your revisions point-by-point must accompany the resubmission.You will be requested to upload this Response to Reviewers as a separate file in the Attach Files area.We ask that you resubmit your manuscript within 45 days. After this time, your file will be placed on inactive status and a further submission will be considered a new manuscript.To submit a revision, go to and log in as an Author.You will see a menu item called Submission Needing Revision. You will find your submission record there.Yours sincerely,Joseph J. Bahl, PhDEditorLife SciencesFormat Suggestion: Please access the Guide to Authors at our website to check the format of your article. Pay particular attention to our References style.Reviewers' comments:Reviewer #1:XXXXX （略）Reviewer #2:XXXXX （略）Editors note and suggestions: （注：编辑的建议）Title: Re-write the title to read more smoothly in contemporary English>>>Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies of the antiviral effects of A against virus B.Abstract: Re-write the abstract to read more smoothly.A, an alkaloid isolated from C (注：一种中草药), was tested for antiviral activity against virus B. Both in vitro and in vivo assays along with serum pharmacological experiments showed A to have potent antiviral activity. The pharmacokinetic profile of A in Sprague/Dawley rat plasma after oral administration was measured by HPLC. Blood samples taken at selected time points were analyzed to study potential changes in antiviral pharmacodynamics as measured by infectivity of viruses. From the similarity of the serum concentration profiles and antiviral activity profiles it is concluded that A it self, rather than a metabolite, exerted the effect against the virus prior to bioinactivation. The need for effective clinical agents against virus B and these results suggest the possibility of benefit from further experiments with A.The authors should check to be sure that the terms blood samples, plasma and serum are always used appropriately throughout the abstract and text.Introduction: some sentences can be made less passive. example 1st paragraph>>>> A appears to be the most important alkaloid isolated from the plant, its structural formula is shown in Fig 1. ... While it produced a general inhibition of antibody production lymphocyte proliferation was stimulated (Xia and Wang, 1997). These pharmacological properties suggest a potential use in the treatment of viral myocarditis against virus B that could be studied in experiments in cell culture and animals.>>>The authors should check the entire manuscript for spelling errors (example given: in your text alkaloid is incorrectly spelled alkaloid) >>>The authors should read the guidelines to the authors and not include the first name of the authors being cited in the text. In thereference section the first name should be abbreviated as shown in the guideline to authors (thus the earlier text reference should be (Liu et al., 2003)and the remaining one should be (Chen et al., 2002) >>>>>The authors instead of directly answering the first complex question of reviewer #1 may include the three questions as future research aim in the discussion section.>>>>>>Rather than redrawing figure the authors may choose to amend the wording of the statistical analysis section to state that the result of tables are means +-SEM and for figures are +- SD.>>>>> reviewer #1 comment number 8 and reviewer # 2 comment 3 might be satisfied by inclusion of a representative photo of cells and heart showing CPE. Remember most readers of the journal have never seen what you are trying to describe.Because I think that you can deal with all of the points raised I am hoping to see a revised manuscript that you have carefully checked for errors. If you have questions or do not know how to respond to any of the points raised please contact me at Joseph Bahl, PhD Editor 2 Life Sciences 作者回复信原稿：Dear Dr. Bahl,I’m （注：正式信函不要简写）very appreciate （注：不适合作为给编辑回信的开始，同时有语法错误）for your comments and suggestions.I （注：实际上是学生做的）have conducted in vivo antivirus experiments again （注：要表明是应审稿人或编辑建议而作）. Mice were sacrificed on 15 days and 30 days after infection. Death rate, heart weight to body weight ratio (HW/BW), virus titers and pathologic slices （注：用词错误）were calculated（注：用词不当）. Production of mRNA of IL-10, IFN-γand TNF-αwere （注：语法错误）measured by RT-PCR.I have revised this manuscript and especially paid much attention to your comments and suggestions. I would like to re-submit it to LIFE SCIENCE. Title of manuscript has been changed to “The antivirus effects of A against virus B and its pharmacokineti c behaviour in SD rats serum” to make it more clear and smooth.Answers to Reviewers’ questions were as follows: （注：可附在给编辑的回复信后）Reviewer #1:XXXXXReviewer #2:XXXXXEditors note and suggestions:Title: Re-write the title to read more smoothly in contemporary EnglishAnswer: I have rewrite the title to “The antivirus effects of A against virus B and its pharmacokinetic behaviour in SD rats serum” to make it more clear and smooth（注：多处语法错误）.Abstract: Re-write the abstract to read more smoothly.Answer: I have revise the abstract carefully to make it more smooth and informative（注：语法错误）.The authors should check to be sure that the terms blood samples, plasma and serum are always used appropriately throughout the abstract and text.Answer: I have paid attention to this question and it is clearer （注：不具体）.Introduction:some sentences can be made less passive.Answer: I have revise the whole paper to make sentences less passive and obtained help of my colleague proficient in English （注：语法错误，句子不通顺）.The authors should check the entire manuscript for spelling errors Answer: I’m very sorry to give you so much trouble for those spelling errors （注：不必道歉，按建议修改即可）. I have carefully corrected them.The authors should read the guidelines to the authors and not include the first name of the authors being cited in the text. In the reference section the first name should be abbreviated as shown in the guideline to authors (thus the earlier text reference should be (Liu et al., 2003) and the remaining one should be (Chen et al., 2002)Answer: I changed the style of references.Rather than redrawing figure the authors may choose to amend the wording of the statistical analysis section to state that the result of tables are means +-SEM and for figures are +- SD.Answer: （注：作者请编辑公司帮回答）reviewer #1 comment number 8 and reviewer # 2 comment 3 might be satisfied by inclusion of a representative photo of cells and heart showing CPE. Remember: most readers of the journal have never seen what you are trying to describe.Answer: Thank you for your suggestions. I have supplemented pictures of cardiac pathologic slices in the paper (Fig2).I have to apologize for giving you so much trouble because of those misspelling and confusing statements （注：一般不是延误或人为失误，不必轻易道歉，按建议修改即可）. Your comments and suggestions really helped me a lot. I have put great efforts to this review. I wish it can be satisfactory.If there’s （注：正式信函不要简写）any information I can provide, please don’t hesitate to contact me.Thank you again for your time and patience. Look forward to hear （注：语法错误）from you.Yours SincerelyXxxx Xxxx (通讯作者名)建议修改稿：Dear Dr. Bahl,Thanks you very much for your comments and suggestions.As suggested, we have conducted in vivo antivirus experiments. Mice were sacrificed on 15 days and 30 days after infection with virus B. Mortality, heart weight to body weight ratio (HW/BW), virus titers and pathologic scores were determined. In addition, mRNA expression of IL-10, IFN-γ and TNF-α were measured by RT-PCR.We have revised the manuscript, according to the comments and suggestions of reviewers and editor, and responded, point by point to, the comments as listed below. Since the paper has been revised significantly throughout the text, we feel it is better not to highlight the amendments in the revised manuscript （正常情况最好表明修改处）.The revised manuscript has been edited and proofread by a medical editing company in Hong Kong.I would like to re-submit this revised manuscript to Life Sciences, and hope it is acceptable for publication in the journal.Looking forward to hearing from you soon.With kindest regards,Yours SincerelyXxxx Xxxx (通讯作者名)Replies to Reviewers and EditorFirst of all, we thank both reviewers and editor for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions.Replies to Reviewer #1:Xxxxx （略）Replies to Reviewer #2:Xxxxx （略）Replies to the Editors note and suggestions:Title: Re-write the title to read more smoothly in contmeporary EnglishAnswer: I have rewrite the title to “The antivirus effects of Sophoridine against Coxsac kievirus B3 and its pharmacokinetics in rats” to make it more clear and read more smoothly.Abstract: Re-write the abstract to read more smoothly.Answer: I have rewritten the abstract to make it more informative and read more smoothly.The authors should check to be sure that the terms blood samples, plasma and serum are always used appropriately throughout the abstract and text.Answer: I have paid attention to this issue, and they are now used appropriately throughout the abstract and text in the revised manuscript.Introduction:some sentences can be made less passive.Answer: I have revised the whole paper to make sentences less passive with the help of the editing company.The authors should check the entire manuscript for spelling errors Answer: This has been done by us as well as the editing company.The authors should read the guidelines to the authors and not include the first name of the authors being cited in the text. In the reference section the first name should be abbreviated as shown in the guideline to authors (thus the earlier text reference should be (Liu et al., 2003) and the remaining one should be (Chen et al., 2002)Answer: I have changed the style of references according to the journal.Rather than redrawing figure the authors may choose to ament the wording of the statistical analysis section to state that the result of tables aremeans +-SEM and for figures are +- SD.Answer: SD has been used throughout the text, and shown in the Figs.3 and4 in the revised manuscript.reviewer #1 comment number 8 and reviewer # 2 comment 3 might be satified by inclusion of a representative photo of cells and heart showing CPE. Remember: most readers of the journal have never seen what you are trying to describe.Answer: Thank you very much for the suggestion. I have added pictures of cardiac pathologic changes in the revised manuscript (Fig. 2). 论文题目： Clinical implications of XXXX (一种病理指标) in X cancer 所投杂志：BMC Cancer.结果：这次大修后被接受发表（同时编辑在接受信中提出课题是否得到伦理委员会同意的问题。
letter to editor 回复编辑的信(SCI)
Dear Dr. XXX,Thank you for arranging a timely review for our manuscript. We are pleased to know that our study is of general interest for the readers of NUTRITION. We have carefully evaluated the reviewers’ critical comments and thoughtful suggestions, r esponded to these suggestions point-by-point, and revised the manuscript accordingly. All changes made to the text are in red so that they may be easily identified. With regard to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions, we wish to reply as follows:Enclosures:(1)Correspondences to your reviewers;(2)One copy of the revised manuscript;(3)A floppy disk containing the revised manuscript.(4)Copyright assignmentTo reviewer#11.The author should add a few review articles on ghrelin for readers in theIntroduction.We added two reviews in our revised manuscript.2.The increase in ghrelin levels do not necessary indicate that weight loss in diseaseis well compensated (Introduction and Discussion). This may be interpreted to be insufficient to recover to the previous body weight.There is possibility that the increase in ghrelin levels may result from the insufficient to recover to the previous body weight, but it is more likely that the increase in ghrelin level indicate that weight loss in disease is well compensated.Shimizu et al1 reported that baseline plasma ghrelin level was significantly higher in cachectic patients with lung cancer than in noncachectic patients and control subjects. As weight loss is a chronic process and ghrelin levels may change more rapid than weight loss, the increase in ghrelin in those chronic diseases is unlikely result from the insufficient to recover to the previous body weight. Moreover, this author also reported that follow-up plasma ghrelin level increased in the presence of anorexia after chemotherapy, which further suggests that the increase ghrelin level may represent a compensatory mechanism under catabolic–anabolic imbalance in cachectic patients with lung cancer1.3.The authors should refer to the original report that IL-1b decrease plasma ghrelinlevels(Gastroentelorogy 120:337-345,2001)We referred this article as the reviewer suggested. In fact, this is a mistake of us. Many thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion.4.Ref. 13 dose not include data on ghrelin.We are so sorry to make this mistake for citing the Ref.13. We replaced the reference in the paper.5.There is no report that desacyl ghrelin stimulates food intake. It is the consensusat present acyl ghrelin is involved in feeding response to starvation. Therefore, the authors should be careful about their interpretation described in the last paragraph in page 10.We made it clear in the paper that ghrelin has two isoforms (“active”and “inactive”). Only the “active”isoform is involved in feeding response tostarvation. But the “inactive”isoform has other activities like anti-proliferative activity on tumor cell lines as described in the manuscript.To reviewer#2Major comments1.Earlier studies have shown that circulating ghrelin level is increased inunderweight patients with CHF, lung cancer, and liver cirrhosis. In the present study, however, plasma ghrelin level was decreased despite a significant weight loss in COPD. In addition, earlier studies have reported that circulating ghrelin correlated positively with BMI in patients with CHF and lung cancer. However, the present study demonstrated that plasma ghrelin level correlated positively with BMI in COPD patients. Thus, there are considerable discrepancies between the present study and earlier studies. These discrepancies should be discussed in detail. The author also stated the regulation of ghrelin secretion was disturbed in COPD patients. However, they did not clarify this mechanism.We stated that the role of ghrelin in patients with COPD may be different from its role in CHF, cancer and liver cirrhosis and discussed this difference in the last paragraph of page 9.Following the reviewer’s suggestion, we added that “plasma ghrelin correlated positively with percent predicted residual volume and residual volume/total lung capacity ratio”as the evidence for further supporting that respiratory abnormalities may take part in the regulation of plasma ghrelin levels.2.The authors demonstrated that plasma ghrelin level correlated negatively withplasma TND-a and CRP in COPD patients. However, Nagaya et al. have shown that plasma ghrelin level correlates positively with plasma TNF-a level in patients with CHF. This discrepancy should be discussed.According to the reviewer indicated, we discussed this discrepancy in the second paragraph of page 9.3.The author stated that respiratory abnormalities may take part in the regulation ofplasma ghrelin level in COPD. The authors should describle the relationship between plasma ghrelin level and pulmonary function in COPD.There are evidences that respiratory abnormalities may take part in the regulation of plasma ghrelin level in lung diseases with respiratory abnormalities2,3. As our study was designed to investigate whether the plasma ghrelin levels are increased or decreased in COPD and whether the plasma ghrelin levels relates to the increased systemic inflammation in those patients, so we didn’t analysis the relationship between plasma ghrelin level and pulmonary function.Minor comments1.Circulating ghrelin level exhibits a circadian rhythm. Therefore, the authorsshould describle the limitation of their measurement of ghrelin in single samples.It’s true that circulating ghrelin level exhibits a circadian rhythm and to monitor the ghrelin levels in different time points is better than just measured a single sample. However, we collected the samples at the fasting state (from 9:00 p.m. on the previous night.) by venipuncture at 7:00 a.m. as most studies did2,4. Soour results can exclude the possibility that the difference between groups was result from the circadian rhythm of ghrelin and are well compared with other studies.2.In the Results section, plasma ghrelin level in healthy controls was different withthat in 0.25+0.22ng/ml, whereas, in Figure 1A, it was approximately 1.8ng/ml.We fixed this in our revised manuscript. We are so sorry to make this mistake.To reviewer#31.About the paper of Itoh et al in AJRCC.As the reviewer said, the study by Itoh et al was not published when the current manuscript were submitted. We discussed the difference between the findings of their study and our study in revised manuscript.2.AbstractConclusion: “plasma ghrelin decreased in COPD”. This sounds like the authors have followed subjects for a long time and that the diagnosis COPD was conformed, the plasma ghrelin decreased. This was however not the aim nor the case-a reformulation is necessary.We fixed this as the reviewer suggested in our revised manuscript.3.Introduction(1)Page 2. Ref.1. is a letter to the editor in Br J Nutr and is a commentconcering an earlier published paper. It is not a reference that support the statement. Several other references exist in the literature to be used instead.Thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. We replaced this reference by other one.(2)Page 2, line 5. “To understand weight loss mechanisms in this disease may behelpful to improve quality of life in these patients”. Do you really think that if we researchers understand the mechanisms that automatically would make the patients happier?We replaced this sentence with “To understand weight loss mechanisms in this disease may be helpful to combat weight loss in these patients”4.Methods(1)Patients: How were the patient and control subjects selected?The authors state that none of the control subjects was taking and medications-was that also the case for the patients?That was also the case for the patients. In fact, most of the COPD patients in China do not take any medications when the disease is clinically stable because of economic reason.Page 4, line 2. A short description of ATS criteria would be helpful for readers who are not familiar with those criteria.As those criteria are widely used by researcher and physicians, we did not describe them in our paper as some paper did. If you think it is necessary to do so, we may add a short description.Page4, line3, what do you mean by “other diseases”? COPD patients mostoften have a lot of other diseases.We are so sorry to mis-express this - we just means that those patients did not have the disease that known to affect the plasma ghrelin level. We fixed it in our revised manuscript.Page 4, line 5. If I understand it correctly, none of the COPD patients were smokers or ex-smokers, i.e. another reason exists for their COPD. Cigarette smoking is the main cause of COPD, but here you have studied patients having other reasons for the disease. What dose this mean regarding the representativity of the study group?Could it affect the results in some way?Smoking increases the plasma ghrelin level5. It is difficult for us to define “ex-smokers” because there is no study about that whether the ex-smoking will affect the plasma ghrelin level or not. This may lead to the representativity problem. However, those patients in our study still lost the weight and had system inflammation as most COPD patients did. Further study should be designed to investigate the effect of ex-smoking on plasma ghrelin level.Page 4, line 6.Why do the authors refer to Whatmore et al? That study investigated ghrelin in healthy adolescents and has nothing to do with factor known to affect serum ghrelin level.We are sorry to make this mistake. We replaced this reference.(2)Body compositionPage 4, last line – page 5, line1. The deuterium dilution study performed by Baarends et al was using arm – to – foot bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy. In the current manuscript the foot – to – foot bioelectrical impedance assessment is used. The readers are lead to believe that the foot – to – foot BIA is also validated with deuterium dilution in COPD patients, which I think is not the case.Thanks for the carefulness of the reviewer. However, there are still evidences that our method is well correlated with DEXA6and arm –to –foot bioelectrical impedance7, so it is appropriate to use this method in our study. However, because those sentences will lead to the confusion, we deleted them in revised manuscript according to suggestion of the reviewer.Page 5, line 4. The %fat was calculated by the machine. It should be stated on which material these calculations are based on – healthy subject? –young or old? – How many.According to the instruction of the manufactory, we selected the standard model for this calculation (the other model was athletic). We stated this in the revised manuscript.(3)StatisticalA reference by Scols et al is used to strengthen the use of values below the detection limit and the use of log. Other reasons need to be provided. What if Schols et al did a statistical error using values that were below the detection limit? There do exist statistical reasonsfor log the values –do they exist in this manuscript?It’s very important to select a suitable statistical method for process the data. There are 6 data below the detection limit in ghrelin and 1 data in leptin. Ifthese data were discarded, it may increase the possibility of type two error as lower ghrelin levels were exclude. However, if the data were analyzed originally, it may increase the possibility of type one error as they below the detection limit.So it is reasonable to adopt the method used by Schols et al.As to log transformation, we added the necessary information in the text according to the opinion of the reviewer.5.DiscussionPage 8. line 2-3. COPD patients had lower ghrelin levels compared to the control subjects. Did the control subjects have “normal” ghrelin values?We selected seventeen age-matched healthy males as control subjects.Those subjects were healthy. So we can take their ghrelin levels as “normal”ghrelin values. However, we think true “normal ghrelin values” should be based on large population study.Page9. line 18. Following “CHF, cancer and liver cirrhosis” a reference is needed here.We added references as the reviewer suggested.Page9. last line.ghrelin instead of gherlin.We fixed it.Page 11. Delete the summary, it is the same as the conclusion in the abstract.We wrote the summary according to the guideline for author of the journal. If you think the summary should be cut, we may delete it.6.ReferenceAs mentioned above, some of the references are not appropriate. They should be replaced by more appropriate and explanatory references.Many thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. We replaced those references in the revised manuscript.References:1. Shimizu, Y., Nagaya, N., Isobe, T., et al. Increased plasma ghrelin level in lung cancer cachexia. Clin Cancer Res 2003; 9: 7742. Itoh, T., Nagaya, N., Yoshikawa, M., et al. Elevated Plasma Ghrelin Level in Underweight Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;3. Haqq, A. M., Stadler, D. D., Jackson, R. H., et al. Effects of growth hormone on pulmonary function, sleep quality, behavior, cognition, growth velocity, body composition, and resting energy expenditure in Prader-Willi syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2003; 88: 22064. Nagaya, N., Uematsu, M., Kojima, M., et al. Elevated circulating level of ghrelin in cachexia associated with chronic heart failure: relationships between ghrelin and anabolic/catabolic factors. Circulation 2001; 104: 20345. Fagerberg, B., Hulten, L. M.,Hulthe, J. Plasma ghrelin, body fat, insulin resistance, and smoking in clinically healthy men: the atherosclerosis and insulin resistance study. Metabolism 2003; 52: 14606. Tyrrell, V. J., Richards, G., Hofman, P., et al. Foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis: a valuable tool for the measurement of body composition in children. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord2001; 25: 2737. Nunez, C., Gallagher, D., Visser, M., et al. Bioimpedance analysis: evaluation of leg-to-leg system based on pressure contact footpad electrodes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1997; 29: 524一篇稿子从酝酿到成型历经艰辛，投出去之后又是漫长的等待，好容易收到编辑的回信，得到的往往又是审稿人不留情面的一顿狂批。
用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件教学提纲
用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件众所周知，外审专家对于文章的主要批评意见是非常重要的，因此作者对于这些意见的回复也是尤为关键。
本文就如何用英文就其意见进行回复做一下简单说明:1、In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that您的回复:外审专家对于表1中xxx所提出的问题现已改正。
而后面的一些小改动则不会影响文章对结果的解释。
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1 has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3，paragraph 1(line 3-8)and 2(line 6-11).These do not affect our interpretation of the result.2、我非常仔细地阅读了外审专家的意见，而且我认为文章仅仅因为缺少xxx而被拒绝刊登的。
我承认本应在丈中包含XXX 然后这仅是出于对文章简洁的考量，没有提供相关数据而非疏忽。
I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lacked toxicity data. I admit that l did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3、谢谢您对于我文章“XXX”的回复以及外审专家的意见。
SCI投稿信件的一些套话
SCI投稿信件的一些套话一、投稿信1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML:I am sending a manuscript entitled “” by –which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - .Y ours sincerelymonths however2. Dear Dr. A:Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers.3. Dear Dr. A:Please f ind enclosed for your review an original research arti cle, “” by sb. All authors have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers.二、询问有无收到稿件Dear Editors,We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.三、询问论文审查回音Dear Editors，It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.二、Dear Dr. ***: “inquire about the status of manuscript (No : ****稿件编号)I#39;m not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status ofmy submitted manuscript titled "****" (Ms. Ref. No.: ****) although the statusof "with editor" for my manuscript have been lasting for more than two weeks.I am just wondering that my manuscript has been send to reviewers or not?monthsBest regards四、关于论文的总体审查意见1. This is a carefully done study and the f indings are of considerable interest. A few minor revision are list below.2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benef it of the reader,however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justi f ication. There are given below.3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of thesubject suff icientl y to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their f indings to specialist journal such as –4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of – because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - .6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory.7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the f inding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined. 9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in T able 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays.10. The condition of incubation are poorl y def ined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used?五、给编辑的回信1. In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that –One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.2. I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and c onclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3. Thank you for your letter of –and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “”. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval.4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includ es a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. Y ou will see that our original f indings are conf irmed.5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.6. W e found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in T able 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.11. I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available.13. We prefer to retain the use of T able 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.15. The running title has been changed to “”.16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assayinghexokinase.17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. Thishas been recti f ied. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included(page16, paragraph 2).19. We included a new set of photographs with better def inition than those originally submitted and to which ascale has been added.20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.21. T wo further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Referencesection. These are:22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a morebalance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope thatthe revised manuscript is now suitable for publication.24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper.25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, assuggested by referees.1. 上传或写信或发E-mail投递Dear Prof. xxx(Editor):Attached(写信就用Enclosed) please find the latex(或者PDF) version of my paper entitled "xxx" with the kind request to consider it for publication in the journal xxx.The authors claim that none of the material in the paper has been published or is under considerati on for publication elsewhere.Should you receive the paper, please send me a e-mail to confirm receiptof it.Thanks a lot in advance!Sincerely, yoursxxx地址稍加修改就可以作为一个上传时用的cover letter.2. 收到中期决定一般情况下，收到编辑部的来信，让作者根据审稿人的意见修改，并且在意见中看到审稿人推荐盖文章发表，就成功了一大半。
（完整版）SCI审稿意见回复模板
（完整版）SCI审稿意见回复模板List of ResponsesDear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:Responds to the reviewer’s comments:Reviewer #1:1. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……)Response: ××××××2. Response to comme nt: (……简要列出意见……)Response: ××××××......逐条意见回答，切忌一定不能有遗漏针对不同的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可适当用用：We are very sorry for our negligence of ……...We are very sorry for our incorrect writing ……...It is really true as Reviewer suggested that……We have made correction accordin g to the Reviewer’s comments.We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s suggestionAs Reviewer suggested that……Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we have ……最后特意感谢一下这个审稿人的意见：Special thanks to you for your good comments.Reviewer #2:同上述Reviewer #3:××××××Other changes:1. Line 60-61, the statements of “……” were corrected as “…………”2. Line 107, “……” was added3. Line 129, “……” was deleted××××××We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.。
letter to editor 回复编辑的信(SCI)
Dear Dr. XXX,Thank you for arranging a timely review for our manuscript. We are pleased to know that our study is of general interest for the readers of NUTRITION. We have carefully evaluated the reviewers’ critical comments and thoughtful suggestions, r esponded to these suggestions point-by-point, and revised the manuscript accordingly. All changes made to the text are in red so that they may be easily identified. With regard to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions, we wish to reply as follows:Enclosures:(1)Correspondences to your reviewers;(2)One copy of the revised manuscript;(3)A floppy disk containing the revised manuscript.(4)Copyright assignmentTo reviewer#11.The author should add a few review articles on ghrelin for readers in theIntroduction.We added two reviews in our revised manuscript.2.The increase in ghrelin levels do not necessary indicate that weight loss in diseaseis well compensated (Introduction and Discussion). This may be interpreted to be insufficient to recover to the previous body weight.There is possibility that the increase in ghrelin levels may result from the insufficient to recover to the previous body weight, but it is more likely that the increase in ghrelin level indicate that weight loss in disease is well compensated.Shimizu et al1 reported that baseline plasma ghrelin level was significantly higher in cachectic patients with lung cancer than in noncachectic patients and control subjects. As weight loss is a chronic process and ghrelin levels may change more rapid than weight loss, the increase in ghrelin in those chronic diseases is unlikely result from the insufficient to recover to the previous body weight. Moreover, this author also reported that follow-up plasma ghrelin level increased in the presence of anorexia after chemotherapy, which further suggests that the increase ghrelin level may represent a compensatory mechanism under catabolic–anabolic imbalance in cachectic patients with lung cancer1.3.The authors should refer to the original report that IL-1b decrease plasma ghrelinlevels(Gastroentelorogy 120:337-345,2001)We referred this article as the reviewer suggested. In fact, this is a mistake of us. Many thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion.4.Ref. 13 dose not include data on ghrelin.We are so sorry to make this mistake for citing the Ref.13. We replaced the reference in the paper.5.There is no report that desacyl ghrelin stimulates food intake. It is the consensusat present acyl ghrelin is involved in feeding response to starvation. Therefore, the authors should be careful about their interpretation described in the last paragraph in page 10.We made it clear in the paper that ghrelin has two isoforms (“active”and “inactive”). Only the “active”isoform is involved in feeding response tostarvation. But the “inactive”isoform has other activities like anti-proliferative activity on tumor cell lines as described in the manuscript.To reviewer#2Major comments1.Earlier studies have shown that circulating ghrelin level is increased inunderweight patients with CHF, lung cancer, and liver cirrhosis. In the present study, however, plasma ghrelin level was decreased despite a significant weight loss in COPD. In addition, earlier studies have reported that circulating ghrelin correlated positively with BMI in patients with CHF and lung cancer. However, the present study demonstrated that plasma ghrelin level correlated positively with BMI in COPD patients. Thus, there are considerable discrepancies between the present study and earlier studies. These discrepancies should be discussed in detail. The author also stated the regulation of ghrelin secretion was disturbed in COPD patients. However, they did not clarify this mechanism.We stated that the role of ghrelin in patients with COPD may be different from its role in CHF, cancer and liver cirrhosis and discussed this difference in the last paragraph of page 9.Following the reviewer’s suggestion, we added that “plasma ghrelin correlated positively with percent predicted residual volume and residual volume/total lung capacity ratio”as the evidence for further supporting that respiratory abnormalities may take part in the regulation of plasma ghrelin levels.2.The authors demonstrated that plasma ghrelin level correlated negatively withplasma TND-a and CRP in COPD patients. However, Nagaya et al. have shown that plasma ghrelin level correlates positively with plasma TNF-a level in patients with CHF. This discrepancy should be discussed.According to the reviewer indicated, we discussed this discrepancy in the second paragraph of page 9.3.The author stated that respiratory abnormalities may take part in the regulation ofplasma ghrelin level in COPD. The authors should describle the relationship between plasma ghrelin level and pulmonary function in COPD.There are evidences that respiratory abnormalities may take part in the regulation of plasma ghrelin level in lung diseases with respiratory abnormalities2,3. As our study was designed to investigate whether the plasma ghrelin levels are increased or decreased in COPD and whether the plasma ghrelin levels relates to the increased systemic inflammation in those patients, so we didn’t analysis the relationship between plasma ghrelin level and pulmonary function.Minor comments1.Circulating ghrelin level exhibits a circadian rhythm. Therefore, the authorsshould describle the limitation of their measurement of ghrelin in single samples.It’s true that circulating ghrelin level exhibits a circadian rhythm and to monitor the ghrelin levels in different time points is better than just measured a single sample. However, we collected the samples at the fasting state (from 9:00 p.m. on the previous night.) by venipuncture at 7:00 a.m. as most studies did2,4. Soour results can exclude the possibility that the difference between groups was result from the circadian rhythm of ghrelin and are well compared with other studies.2.In the Results section, plasma ghrelin level in healthy controls was different withthat in 0.25+0.22ng/ml, whereas, in Figure 1A, it was approximately 1.8ng/ml.We fixed this in our revised manuscript. We are so sorry to make this mistake.To reviewer#31.About the paper of Itoh et al in AJRCC.As the reviewer said, the study by Itoh et al was not published when the current manuscript were submitted. We discussed the difference between the findings of their study and our study in revised manuscript.2.AbstractConclusion: “plasma ghrelin decreased in COPD”. This sounds like the authors have followed subjects for a long time and that the diagnosis COPD was conformed, the plasma ghrelin decreased. This was however not the aim nor the case-a reformulation is necessary.We fixed this as the reviewer suggested in our revised manuscript.3.Introduction(1)Page 2. Ref.1. is a letter to the editor in Br J Nutr and is a commentconcering an earlier published paper. It is not a reference that support the statement. Several other references exist in the literature to be used instead.Thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. We replaced this reference by other one.(2)Page 2, line 5. “To understand weight loss mechanisms in this disease may behelpful to improve quality of life in these patients”. Do you really think that if we researchers understand the mechanisms that automatically would make the patients happier?We replaced this sentence with “To understand weight loss mechanisms in this disease may be helpful to combat weight loss in these patients”4.Methods(1)Patients: How were the patient and control subjects selected?The authors state that none of the control subjects was taking and medications-was that also the case for the patients?That was also the case for the patients. In fact, most of the COPD patients in China do not take any medications when the disease is clinically stable because of economic reason.Page 4, line 2. A short description of ATS criteria would be helpful for readers who are not familiar with those criteria.As those criteria are widely used by researcher and physicians, we did not describe them in our paper as some paper did. If you think it is necessary to do so, we may add a short description.Page4, line3, what do you mean by “other diseases”? COPD patients mostoften have a lot of other diseases.We are so sorry to mis-express this - we just means that those patients did not have the disease that known to affect the plasma ghrelin level. We fixed it in our revised manuscript.Page 4, line 5. If I understand it correctly, none of the COPD patients were smokers or ex-smokers, i.e. another reason exists for their COPD. Cigarette smoking is the main cause of COPD, but here you have studied patients having other reasons for the disease. What dose this mean regarding the representativity of the study group?Could it affect the results in some way?Smoking increases the plasma ghrelin level5. It is difficult for us to define “ex-smokers” because there is no study about that whether the ex-smoking will affect the plasma ghrelin level or not. This may lead to the representativity problem. However, those patients in our study still lost the weight and had system inflammation as most COPD patients did. Further study should be designed to investigate the effect of ex-smoking on plasma ghrelin level.Page 4, line 6.Why do the authors refer to Whatmore et al? That study investigated ghrelin in healthy adolescents and has nothing to do with factor known to affect serum ghrelin level.We are sorry to make this mistake. We replaced this reference.(2)Body compositionPage 4, last line – page 5, line1. The deuterium dilution study performed by Baarends et al was using arm – to – foot bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy. In the current manuscript the foot – to – foot bioelectrical impedance assessment is used. The readers are lead to believe that the foot – to – foot BIA is also validated with deuterium dilution in COPD patients, which I think is not the case.Thanks for the carefulness of the reviewer. However, there are still evidences that our method is well correlated with DEXA6and arm –to –foot bioelectrical impedance7, so it is appropriate to use this method in our study. However, because those sentences will lead to the confusion, we deleted them in revised manuscript according to suggestion of the reviewer.Page 5, line 4. The %fat was calculated by the machine. It should be stated on which material these calculations are based on – healthy subject? –young or old? – How many.According to the instruction of the manufactory, we selected the standard model for this calculation (the other model was athletic). We stated this in the revised manuscript.(3)StatisticalA reference by Scols et al is used to strengthen the use of values below the detection limit and the use of log. Other reasons need to be provided. What if Schols et al did a statistical error using values that were below the detection limit? There do exist statistical reasonsfor log the values –do they exist in this manuscript?It’s very important to select a suitable statistical method for process the data. There are 6 data below the detection limit in ghrelin and 1 data in leptin. Ifthese data were discarded, it may increase the possibility of type two error as lower ghrelin levels were exclude. However, if the data were analyzed originally, it may increase the possibility of type one error as they below the detection limit.So it is reasonable to adopt the method used by Schols et al.As to log transformation, we added the necessary information in the text according to the opinion of the reviewer.5.DiscussionPage 8. line 2-3. COPD patients had lower ghrelin levels compared to the control subjects. Did the control subjects have “normal” ghrelin values?We selected seventeen age-matched healthy males as control subjects.Those subjects were healthy. So we can take their ghrelin levels as “normal”ghrelin values. However, we think true “normal ghrelin values” should be based on large population study.Page9. line 18. Following “CHF, cancer and liver cirrhosis” a reference is needed here.We added references as the reviewer suggested.Page9. last line.ghrelin instead of gherlin.We fixed it.Page 11. Delete the summary, it is the same as the conclusion in the abstract.We wrote the summary according to the guideline for author of the journal. If you think the summary should be cut, we may delete it.6.ReferenceAs mentioned above, some of the references are not appropriate. They should be replaced by more appropriate and explanatory references.Many thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. We replaced those references in the revised manuscript.References:1. Shimizu, Y., Nagaya, N., Isobe, T., et al. Increased plasma ghrelin level in lung cancer cachexia. Clin Cancer Res 2003; 9: 7742. Itoh, T., Nagaya, N., Yoshikawa, M., et al. Elevated Plasma Ghrelin Level in Underweight Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;3. Haqq, A. M., Stadler, D. D., Jackson, R. H., et al. Effects of growth hormone on pulmonary function, sleep quality, behavior, cognition, growth velocity, body composition, and resting energy expenditure in Prader-Willi syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2003; 88: 22064. Nagaya, N., Uematsu, M., Kojima, M., et al. Elevated circulating level of ghrelin in cachexia associated with chronic heart failure: relationships between ghrelin and anabolic/catabolic factors. Circulation 2001; 104: 20345. Fagerberg, B., Hulten, L. M.,Hulthe, J. Plasma ghrelin, body fat, insulin resistance, and smoking in clinically healthy men: the atherosclerosis and insulin resistance study. Metabolism 2003; 52: 14606. Tyrrell, V. J., Richards, G., Hofman, P., et al. Foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis: a valuable tool for the measurement of body composition in children. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord2001; 25: 2737. Nunez, C., Gallagher, D., Visser, M., et al. Bioimpedance analysis: evaluation of leg-to-leg system based on pressure contact footpad electrodes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1997; 29: 524一篇稿子从酝酿到成型历经艰辛，投出去之后又是漫长的等待，好容易收到编辑的回信，得到的往往又是审稿人不留情面的一顿狂批。
回复编辑部邮件英文范文
回复编辑部邮件英文范文Subject: Response to Editorial Department Email.Dear [Editor's Name],。
I hope this email finds you well. I am writing in response to the email from the editorial department regarding [specific topic or request mentioned in the previous email].First and foremost, I would like to express mygratitude for bringing this matter to my attention. Your feedback and suggestions are highly valued, and I am committed to addressing any concerns or making necessary revisions as per the editorial department's recommendations.In response to the specific points raised in your email, I have carefully reviewed the content and have taken noteof the areas that require further attention. I will ensure that the necessary revisions are made to meet the editorialstandards and align with the publication's guidelines.Furthermore, I would like to assure the editorial department that I am dedicated to delivering high-quality and well-researched content. I am open to any additional feedback or guidance that may further enhance the article and contribute to its overall quality.Please feel free to reach out if there are any specific details or revisions that you would like me to focus on. I am more than willing to collaborate and make the required adjustments to ensure that the article meets the editorial department's expectations.Once again, I appreciate the time and effort invested by the editorial department in reviewing and providing feedback on the submitted content. I am looking forward to working together to finalize the article and move it closer to publication.Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am confident that with our collaborative efforts, we canproduce an article that meets the standards of the publication.Best regards,。
用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件
欢迎阅读用英文巧妙回复SCI 期刊编辑信件众所周知，外审专家对于文章的主要批评意见是非常重要的，因此作者对于这些意见的回复也是尤为关键。
本文就如何用英文就其意见进行回复做一下简单说明:1、Inreplytothereferee’smaincriticismofpaper,itispossibletosaythat您的回复:外审专家对于表1中xxx 所提出的问题现已改正。
而后面的一些小改动则2而被拒3Thankyouforyourletterof —andforthereferee’scommentsconcerningourmanuscriptentit led.Wehavestudiedtheircommentscarefullyandhavemadecorrectionwhichwehopemeet withtheirapproval.4、我随信附上修过的文章，其中增添了在外审专家建议下新做的实验报告，可进一步证实原有结论Ienclosedarevisedmanuscriptwhichincludesareportofadditionalexperimentsdoneatther eferee’ssuggestion.Youwillseethatouroriginalfindingsareconfirmed.．5、我们附上依照审稿专家的意见修改的原稿，其中修改部分用红色划线标注。
Wearesendingtherevisedmmanuscriptaccordingtothecommentsofthereviewers.Revised portionareunderlinedinred.678910Wedeletedtherelevantpassagesincetheyarenotessentialtothecontentsofthepaper.11、我觉得外审专家对于XXX的评论有些误解。
Ifeelthatthereviewer’scommentsconcerningFigures1and2resul tfromamisinterpretation ofthedata.12、如果在我们的系统中有非蛋白抑制剂，我们就会将其设为控制组。
用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件
用英文巧妙回复S C I期刊编辑信件Modified by JACK on the afternoon of December 26, 2020用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件众所周知，外审专家对于文章的主要批评意见是非常重要的，因此作者对于这些意见的回复也是尤为关键。
本文就如何用英文就其意见进行回复做一下简单说明:1、In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that您的回复:外审专家对于表1中xxx所提出的问题现已改正。
而后面的一些小改动则不会影响文章对结果的解释。
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1 has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3，paragraph1(line 3-8)and 2(line 6-11).These do not affect our interpretation of the result. 2、我非常仔细地阅读了外审专家的意见，而且我认为文章仅仅因为缺少xxx而被拒绝刊登的。
我承认本应在丈中包含XXX 然后这仅是出于对文章简洁的考量，没有提供相关数据而非疏忽。
I have read the referee’scomments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lacked toxicity data. I admit that l did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3、谢谢您对于我文章“XXX”的回复以及外审专家的意见。
回复sci编辑部邮件范文
回复sci编辑部邮件范文Dear Editor,Thank you for your email.I am pleased to inform you that I have carefully reviewed the manuscript titled "The Role of Mitochondrial Function in Age-Related Disease" submitted by Dr.Jane Doe and co-authors.尊敬的编辑，感谢您的来信。
我很高兴地通知您，我已经仔细审阅了由Dr.Jane Doe及其同事提交的题为“线粒体功能在年龄相关疾病中的作用”的手稿。
After a thorough evaluation, I am satisfied with the quality of the research presented in the manuscript.The authors have conducted comprehensive experiments and provided a clear discussion of their findings.The results presented in the paper contribute valuable insights into the understanding of mitochondrial dysfunction in age-related diseases, which is of great significance in the field of aging research.经过全面评估，我对手稿中呈现的研究质量感到满意。
作者们进行了全面的实验，并清楚地讨论了他们的发现。
论文中呈现的结果对手稿中呈现的研究质量感到满意。
作者们进行了全面的实验，并清楚地讨论了他们的发现。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
创作编号：BG7531400019813488897SX创作者：别如克*用英文巧妙回复SCI期刊编辑信件众所周知，外审专家对于文章的主要批评意见是非常重要的，因此作者对于这些意见的回复也是尤为关键。
本文就如何用英文就其意见进行回复做一下简单说明:1、In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper,it is possible to say that您的回复:外审专家对于表1中xxx所提出的问题现已改正。
而后面的一些小改动则不会影响文章对结果的解释。
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1 has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3，paragraph 1(line 3-8)and 2(line 6-11).These do not affect our interpretation of the result.2、我非常仔细地阅读了外审专家的意见，而且我认为文章仅仅因为缺少xxx而被拒绝刊登的。
我承认本应在丈中包含XXX 然后这仅是出于对文章简洁的考量，没有提供相关数据而非疏忽。
I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on thesole grounds that it lacked toxicity data. I admit that l did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3、谢谢您对于我文章“XXX”的回复以及外审专家的意见。
我们已经仔细研究了他们的意见，并做了相应的改正，希望获得他们的认可。
Thank you for your letter of—and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval.4、我随信附上修过的文章，其中增添了在外审专家建议下新做的实验报告，可进一步证实原有结论I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed.．5、我们附上依照审稿专家的意见修改的原稿，其中修改部分用红色划线标注。
We are sending the revised m manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.6、外审专家的意见对我们很有帮助，我们已经按照这些意见对原稿做了修改。
We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the m manuscript.7、很高兴得知审稿专家对文章的好评we are pleased tonote the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.8、感谢你的来信。
我很高兴稿件经修改后可在XXX 杂志发表。
Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with min0r revision．9、为此，我们进行了一系列进一步的实验，结果见炙5的总结。
由此我们得出结论内在的因素起不到什么作用。
We have therefore completed a further series of experiments，the result of which are summarized in Table 5.From this we conclude that intrinsic factor does not account.10、我们删除了对文章不重要的段落。
We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.11、我觉得外审专家对于XXX的评论有些误解。
I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.12、如果在我们的系统中有非蛋白抑制剂，我们就会将其设为控制组。
We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system，as a control，if one had been available.13、我们希望保留表4，在结果部分新加入的一段话帮助解释了其存在的意义。
We prefer to retain the use of Table 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraphinserted at the end of the Results section.14、尽量审稿专家并不认为有必要测量细胞的温度，我们却不这样认为。
Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the ternperature of the cells，we consider it essential.．15、页眉标题已改为“”。
The running title has been changed to"".16、在材料与方法段中已包括了xxx的细节。
The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.17、原稿中对于xxx的描述不正确，现已纠正。
很感谢外审专家的指正。
The concentration of HAT media (page1 2 paragraph 2)was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.18、依照两位外审专家的建议，现增添了对于XXX的讨论。
As suggested by both referees，a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included(page16，paragraph 2).19、较原来的图片，我们在新的一组图片中增加了对比例尺的定义。
We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.20、根据外审专家的意见，我们已重新绘制了图3和4。
Following the suggestion of the referees，we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.21、我在炙章的正文和参考文献中增加了对投稿后发表的另外两篇文章的引用。
这两篇文章是:Two further papers，published since our original submission，have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:22、很感谢外审专家的宝贵意见，希望修改后的文章更公平的、完整地记录了我们的研究工作。
我们相信修订的稿件可以达到出版要求。
We should Iike to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a m ore balance and better account of our work W e trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.．23、我非常感谢您和外审专家对于文章修改方面给予的帮助。
希望修后稿件可以在责刊发表。
I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning im provem ent to this paper.I hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication.24、很感掰您和外审专家对于稿件修改方面的建议。
I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper.25、很抱歉由于额外新做实验而导致返修稿件时间上的延误。