审稿意见回复信英文模板和语料总结

审稿意见回复信英文模板和语料总结

模板1.

Dear prof. XX and dear reviewers

Re: Manuscript ID: XXXXX and Title: XXXXXX

Thank you for your letter and the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “XXXXXX ” (ID). Those comments are valuable and very helpful. We have read through comments carefully and have made corrections. Based on the instructions provided in your letter, we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Revisions in the text are shown using red highlight for additions, and strikethrough font for deletions. The responses to the reviewer’s comments are marked in red and presented following.

We would love to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript and we highly appreciate your time and consideration.

Sincerely.

XXXXX.

Reviewer #1:

Q1. Interpretation could be deepened regarding xx. 关于xx的讨论应该更深入一些.

Response：We are grateful for the suggestion. To be more clearly and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a more detailed interpretation regarding xxx. More detailed statistical analysis was added on page…

Q2.the English language needs to be revised for clarity …

Response：We apologize for the language problems in the original manuscript. The language presentation was improved with assistance from a native English speaker with appropriate research background.

Q3.Page 10, the last sentence of the first chapter should read: …,

Response：We agree with the comment and re-wrote the sentence in the revised manuscript as the following: ….

Q4.Please provide details of results, and please analyze and discuss it.

Response：We are grateful for the suggestion. As suggested by the reviewer, we have added more details of…

其他语料：

1. Thank you for your suggestion. As suggested by reviewer, we have added the suggested content to the manuscript on page…

2. Thank you for your comments, the discussion regarding this question is presented following: …

3. We deeply appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion. According to the reviewer’s comment, we have added a more detailed interpretation regarding…

4. Thank you for your comment, and our reply is as follows: …

5. Response: We deeply appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion. According to the reviewer’s comment, we have provided more details to describe the possible reasons.

6. We are extremely grateful to reviewer for pointing out this problem. We have…

7. We are grateful for the suggestion. To be more clear and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a brief description as follows:

8. We have modified this expression throughout the text according to the comment.

9. Thank you for the suggestion. We have added the information required as explained above (Lines 6-28, page 6)

10. Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the information showed in the work suggested by the reviewer (Line 41, page 3).

11. Thank you for the suggestion. We have added the information required as explained above (Lines 6-28, page 6).

12. Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1).Thank you for the title suggested. The precedent version of the title has been replaced, becoming…

13. We appreciate the reviewer’s positive evaluation of our work.

14. Our deepest gratitude goes to you for your careful work and thoughtful suggestions that have helped improve this paper substantially.

15. We have carefully revised the language issue again based on the latest file uploaded on October 5th. This revision is highlighted in green (for adding) and strikethrough font (for deleting) in the text. At the same time, we have uploaded the file of the revised manuscript and flowchart file.

16. Thank you for your precious comments and advice. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have revised the manuscript accordingly，and our point-by-point responses are presented above.

17. We appreciate the reviewer’s positive evaluation of our work and agree with the comments regarding the limitations of our study.

模板2.来自公众号《大葱的后花园》

Dear Editors (或编辑的具体姓名Prof. xxx) and reviewers:

Thank you for your precious comments and advice. 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:

Response to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer #1:

1. 一般第一段是reviewer对你文章的总结。

Thank you for your summary. We really appreciate your efforts in reviewing our manuscript. We have revised the manuscript accordingly. Our point-by-point responses are detailed below.

2. 你的语言很差，通篇很多语法错误: The reviewers are quite unanimous in that, this is an important piece of work with a large number of patients. However, the English grammatical errors detract from the quality of the paper and makes it difficult to read.

Thank you for your careful review. We are very sorry for the mistakes in this manuscript and inconvenience they caused in your reading. The manuscript has been thoroughly revised and rewritten by a native English speaker (或者杂志推荐的润色公司如American journal expert), so we hope it can meet the journal’s standard.

3. 你的文章没有新意，你说的大家都知道：The results are not novel.

Thank you for your careful review. We believe that most specialists in XXX knows that XXX. 详细的介绍你的创新性，最好加几篇参考文献。Despite the conclusions are the same as we thought, we provide the basis for common sense.

4. 你的文章没有XXX数据， One of the major weak points of this article is that there is no comparative data……

Thank you for your careful review. We respectively screened xxxx. (1)：加数据，详细的加，重新做统计，不仅要放到Results，为了reviewer方便要放到回复下面。(2)加不了数据，详细的给reviewer写明为啥加不了数据。在discussion和limitation中加入你为什么加不了数据，因为没条件没研究经费XXX…

5. 你没引用某个文献。In the discussion part about the, the authors are recommended to cite the first articles as below.

Thank you for your careful review. These two important pieces of research found that XXX. We cited these two articles in the discussion. 一定要加reviewer建议的文献，可能就是reviewer自己的文章，可以搜一下同一作者的文章，多引用几篇。

6. 你的纳入标准写的啥，我都看不懂。How many patients had xxxx and how many had xxx

Thank you for your careful review. We apologize for not describing the inclusion criteria clearer. We have now added flow diagram of the study participants. (有时候你自己认为很清楚，大家觉得很乱，所以加个流程图就很明了了)

最后感谢下审稿人的付出，就OK了

Thank you for your careful review. We really appreciate your efforts in reviewing our manuscript during this unprecedented and challenging time. We wish good health to you, your family, and community. Your careful review has helped to make our study clearer and more comprehensive.

模板3.

Dear Editors and Reviewers,

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. We really appreciate all your generous comments and suggestions! Please find my revisions in the re-submitted files.

Response to the reviewer’s comments

We are very grateful to your comments for the manuscript. According to your advice, we amended the relevant part in manuscript. All of your questions were answered one by one.

1….

2…

3…

模板4.

Dear Editor, Dear reviewers

Thank you for your letter dated February 22. We were pleased to know that our work was rated as potentially acceptable for publication in Journal, subject to adequate revision. We thank the reviewers for the time and effort that they have put into reviewing the previous version of the manuscript. Their suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. Based on the instructions provided in your letter, we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Accordingly, we have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different color (red). We would like also to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript.

We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Journal of Mountain Science. Sincerely, XXXX

模板5.（摘自丁香园的某位战友，但是抱歉，我忘记账号了）

Detailed Responses to Reviewer

Response to reviewer #1:

The manuscript and writing are very similar the review below: ****

Response: We agree with your comment. The frame design of this manuscript is similar really to above published review. However, the emphases of these two reviews are distinct.

In the previous review, the author has discussed how *******including Parkinson’s disease (PD), Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Whereas, in the present manuscript, we have mainly focused on the effects how *****8.

In addition to some *** discussed in the previous review, we have also summarized many other target proteins, including ,,***,,. Moreover, we have introduced the latest research findings which were even not mentioned in the previous review. Furthermore, in terms of treatment, we have provided more details about target *** to a particular therapeutic aim.

We thought our work could attract the researcher’s attention, because we have provided more comprehensive and detailed information about *****. For this reason, we submitted the current manuscript.

Response to reviewer #2:

1. This is an excellent review on*** giving a systematic and detailed picture on this important issue.

Response: We appreciate the reviewer’s positive evaluation of our work.

2. Some minor points: Some abbreviations are appear more than one time (like MAP), or missing (PSD-95), or do not appear the first time mentioned (VDAC).

Response: We apologize for the language problems in the original manuscript. Following the reviewer’s suggestion, we have deleted the repeated abbreviations, like “MAP”, “Cdk-5” and “NMDA”, introduced the “PSD-95” at its first mention and added the “VDAC” after its full name. Language presentation was improved with assistance from a native English speaker with appropriate research background.

3. In page 7 2th paragraph: “****” sentence not clear.

Response: We agree with the comment and re-wrote the sentence in the revised manuscript as the following: “*******.”

4. In page 10, at bottom, that “*****” can it be explained a bit more?

Response: We deeply appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion. According to the reviewer’s comment, we provided more details to describe this mechanism as the following:

“******.”

5. Some typos.

Response: We apologize for the mistakes in the manuscript and also carefully checked the entire manuscript for typographic, grammatical and formatting errors.

想要延长稿件修改的最后期限邮件模板

Dear prof. xxx，

Thank you very much for your E-mail of “September 5, 2019” regarding our manuscript " ID: xxxx ". Sincere thanks also go to the responsible and kind reviewers for helping us improve our manuscript in both scientific and linguistic aspects.

As soon as receiving your E-mail, all the authors discussed the comments one by one carefully. We totally agree with the reviewers that major and moderate revisions need to make in our manuscript. We also found that it would be difficult to address some issues raised by the reviewers. For example, we need to supplement the data and redo the statistical analysis, which takes a long time. Another dilemma is that we have applied a professional copyediting services to solve the language problem raised by reviewers, but we have not yet received the revised manuscript.

So, we do not think the revised manuscript will be finished by “October 5, 2019”. We estimate it will take a week longer to prepare the revised manuscript and the response to the comments.

We would be grateful if you could postpone the deadline on “October 12, 2019”.

Thank you once again for your attention to our paper.

Best Regards.

Yours sincerely,

XXXX.

以下中文版摘自公众号《浙大学报英文版》

如果审稿人认为你的论文创新性不强，那么你可以回复说：“谢谢你的意见。我们这篇论文的确没有‘震惊宇宙’，并且原稿的引言部分没有把新意、重要性写清楚；有鉴于此，我们已经加强了引言部分，把创新性强调出来。本文的创新性就在于……”

如果审稿人误解了你一句话的意思，那么你不应该在心中骂审稿人愚蠢，也不应在答辩信中费唇舌解释，而应该这样想——审稿人是读者的代表，既然审稿人读了文章，产生误解，那么其他读者读了这篇文章也会产生误解。于是，可以把涉及的句子重新变换一下，写得清楚一些，并在答辩信中写：“谢谢提醒。我们原本的写作的确会引起歧义，现在我们根据审稿人的意见修改如下……”

如果审稿人要你补充一个实验，那么你就得做这个实验。如果实验结果能说明问题，那么要把实验结果写到论文里去。如果实验结果不能说明问题，也要在答辩信中展示、分析数据，告诉审稿人已经做了要求的实验，但没有得到有价值的结果，原因是什么。甚至可以把这些数据放到“支撑信息”部分，让审稿人觉得作者并没有心虚。

如果审稿人要你补充一个实验，但你没有实验条件，或者不能在短时期内做出这个实验怎么办？有的作者回复说：“审稿人建议的这个实验不重要，和本文无关。”但其实，作者应该静下心来分析——审稿人要求补充这个实验，是要了解什么信息或者达到什么实验目的（比如知道样品的元素含量）？如果作者没有审稿人提及的那个实验仪器，那么用别的仪器能否得到这个信息？作者应该想法设法补充实验，满足审稿人的要求，让审稿人“无话可说”。

万一还是无法满足审稿人的要求，那么作者也应在答辩信中诚恳说出原因，并且在修改论文时有所行动。比如，审稿人问：“反应机理是什么？”你由于种种原因无法弄清反应机理，那么应该在论文的讨论或者结论部分加上：“本文的主要目的是开发新的催化剂，但反应机理不清楚。这些催化剂的后续催化应用和反应机理值得进一步研究。”

你对实验现象提出了一种解释，但审稿人提出另一种解释，怎么办？我们要懂一点科学哲学。对于一个现象，当然可能有几种解释，我们不能执拗地说别的解释一定是错的，而要用实验数据来说话。如果实验数据说明审稿人的解释是合理的（作者原先的解释也没错），那么可以在修改论文时把新的解释加上，并且说实验数据和这个解释吻合，但两个解释究竟哪个更合理，有待于进一步验证。而如果实验数据说明审稿人的解释不合理，那么在修改论文时，可以写：“对于以上数据还有另外一种解释……但我们的实验结果并不支撑这种解释。”这么做的“原理”就在于：审稿人代表读者来读你的稿子，如果你只是在答辩信中告诉审稿人他的解释不成立，而没有把相关内容写到论文里，那么读者读到你的论文，同样会产生困惑。

如果审稿人要你针对文中某一个论断引用几篇文献，但你发现审稿人指定的这几篇文献和这个论断无关，怎么办？人非完人，审稿人的心中也有“自我”，甚至会“自私”。他要你引用的几篇文献，有可能包含着他自己发表的论文。作者处理这样的事情就要讲究“艺术”——这些论文引用在这一段不贴切，那么能否贴切地引用在别的段落？如果找不到现成的段落，那么能否阅读了这几篇文献后，想出一两句贴切的句子，增补在论文的某处，并引用这几篇文献？如果实在找不到引用这几篇文献的地方，能否甄别出这些文献的作者，并搜索这些作者别的文献，把这些“替代文献”贴切地引用到你的论文中，并告诉审稿人在哪里进行了修改？