SCI论文审稿意见集锦

关于前言

• …For instance the second sentence appears to be out of the blue. Please, provide better connections between sentences.
• Introduction is missing some very relevant references…
• The description of “Introduction” still needs to be improved, as some contents are redundancy while some are lacked.
• How is their analysis different from the PLOS ONE paper?
• At the end of the Introduction is not clear which are the innovative aspects of the research.
• The authors state that “there are a few reports about proteins induced by water deficit”. Please be more precise.
• How was soil sterilised? Please give some soil properties. Please give the sand: fungus ratio. How was the fungus cultivated?
• I wonder whether in the introduction the Authors could add some more references on the already knowledge on drought stress and ECM.
• The author should emphasize the  rational for using human mesenchymal stem cell for your study in the introduction section.
• The aim is not clear and not well written.

关于材料与方法

• The description of Affymetrix microarray data is not informative enough, and needs the patients’ info.
• The experimental details are inadequate. No mention has been made on the source of seeds or the mycorrhizal inoculum.
• There is no information on the number of replicates and the experimental design.

关于结果及图表

• There are also structure errors, as methods are also being described in the “results” section and objectives in the “material and methods” section.
• The caption of the tables should be more detailed…
• There were too many tables and figures in this paper…
• The figure is too crowded…
• Probably the quality of the pictures in figure 3 could be improved in the last version.

关于讨论

• Authors should avoid the first three sentences, they are part of a introduction.
• Include an elaborate discussion explaining the exact significance of your findings.
• Authors need to emphasize the novel insights obtained from their study.
• Authors are suggested to validate these results using few more such entries.
• The Discussion part was monotonous…
• The description of this part needs to be touched up in logic…

关于结论

• The conclusion section should revised by definite conclusion sentence.
• Only some important and significant conclusions could be revealed in this section.

总结一下，前言中最主要还是要突出文章的目的性和创新性，语句之间要有相关性和连贯性，前言与文章的主题紧密联系在一起；材料方法中要尽可能的详细；结果中不能出现材料方法，图表的设计要合理、规范、清晰；讨论中既要与前人研究挂钩，又要强调文章的结果，讨论要具有逻辑性，不能与前言混为一谈；结论要简单明了，直接得出最重要的结论。另外，还有一个硬伤就是语言问题，只要是中国人投的文章，几乎每个审稿人都会毫不客气的告诉你，The paper suffers from a poorly written English… 这时你需要认真修改文章，必要时可寻求专业的SCI论文润色机构的帮助。

目前几乎所有期刊都会对来稿进行论文查重，据了解英文投稿目前有95%以上的期刊是使用iThenticate检测来稿，投稿前检测请认准iThenticate中文官网： http://www.ithenticate.com.cn/，安全可靠，投稿无忧！

喜欢 (5) 赏

[turnitinhk@sina.com]

分享 (0)