文章修回时，需要对审稿人提出的问题作出回复。但是许多新手对于审稿人注重的问题一无所知，今天我就给大家搜集了SCI论文审稿过程中审稿人提得较多的一些问题。
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！
本站的文章和资源来自互联网或者站长的原创，按照 CC BY -NC -SA 3.0 CN协议发布和共享，转载或引用本站文章应遵循相同协议。如果有侵犯版权的资源请尽快联系站长，我们会在24h内删除有争议的资源。
