投稿回復語
論文——題目科學論文都有題目，不能「無題」。論文題目一般20字左右。題目大小應與內容符合，盡量不設副題，不用第1報、第2報之類。論文題目都用直敘口氣，不用驚嘆號或問號，也不能將科學論文題目寫成廣告語或新聞報道用語。
署名
(二)論文——署名科學論文應該署真名和真實的工作單位。主要體現責任、成果歸屬並便於後人追蹤研究。嚴格意義上的論文作者是指對選題、論證、查閱文獻、方案設計、建立方法、實驗操作、整理資料、歸納總結、撰寫成文等全過程負責的人，應該是能解答論文的有關問題者。往往把參加工作的人全部列上，那就應該以貢獻大小依次排列。論文署名應徵得本人同意。學術指導人根據實際情況既可以列為論文作者，也可以一般致謝。行政領導人一般不署名。
❷ 投稿時應說什麼禮貌用語
普通問候就可以了，對象可以是某某雜志社負責人或者某某雜志編輯。然後註明內論文的基本資料容
如 所有作者真實姓名 通訊作者 聯系方式 郵箱 學校地址 項目支持基金 投稿欄目 等。
有些雜志社是採用上傳的方式收稿，到雜志主頁上按照提示一步一步操作就可以了。
祝你好運！望採納
❸ 如何回復SCI投稿審稿人意見
1.所有問題必須逐條回答。
2.盡量滿足意見中需要補充的實驗。
3.滿足不了的也不要迴避，說明不能做的合理理由。
4.審稿人推薦的文獻一定要引用，並討論透徹。
以下是本人對審稿人意見的回復一例，僅供參考。
續兩點經驗：
1. 最重要的是逐條回答，即使你答不了，也要老實交代；不要太狡猾，以至於耽誤事；
2. 絕大部分實驗是不要真追加的，除非你受到啟發，而想改投另外高檔雜志----因為你既然已經寫成文章，從邏輯上肯定是一個完整的 「story」 了。
以上指國際雜志修稿。國內雜志太多，以至於稿源吃緊，基本沒有退稿，所以你怎麼修都是接受。
我的文章水平都不高，主要是沒有明顯的創新性，也很苦惱。但是除了開始幾篇投在國內雜志外，其他都在國際雜志（也都是SCI）發表。以我了解的情況，我單位其他同志給國內雜志投稿，退稿的極少，只有一次被《某某科學進展》拒絕。究其原因，除了我上面說的，另外可能是我單位寫稿子還是比較嚴肅，導師把關也比較嚴的緣故。
自我感覺總結（不一定對）：
1）國內雜志審稿極慢（少數除外），但現在也有加快趨勢；
2）國內雜志編輯人員認真負責的人不多，稿子寄去後，少則幾個月，多則一年多沒有任何消息；
3）國內雜志要求修改的稿子，如果你自己不修，他最後也給你發；
4）國外雜志要求補充實驗的，我均以解釋而過關，原因見少帖）。還因為：很少雜志編輯把你的修改稿再寄給當初審稿人的，除非審稿人特別請求。編輯不一定懂你的東西，他只是看到你認真修改，回答疑問了，也就接受了（當然高檔雜志可能不是這樣，我的經驗只限定一般雜志（影響因子1-5）。
歡迎大家批評指正。
我常用的回復格式:
Dear reviewer:
I am very grateful to your comments for the manuscript. According with your advice, we amended the relevant part in manuscript. Some of your questions were answered below.
1）
2）
....
引用審稿人推薦的文獻的確是很重要的，要想辦法和自己的文章有機地結合起來。
至於實驗大部分都可以不用補做，關鍵是你要讓審稿人明白你的文章的重點是什麼，這個實驗對你要強調的重點內容不是很必要，或者你現在所用的方法已經可以達到目的就行了。
最後要注意，審稿人也會犯錯誤，不僅僅是筆誤也有專業知識上的錯誤，因為編輯找的審稿人未必是你這個領域的專家。只要自己是正確的就要堅持。在回復中委婉地表達一下你的意見，不過要注意商討語氣哦！
我得回復格式是這樣的：
Dear Professor xx:
Thank you very much for your letter dated xxx xx xxxx, and the referees』 reports. Based on your comment and request, we have made extensive modification on the original manuscript. Here, we attached revised manuscript in the formats of both PDF and MS word, for your approval. A document answering every question from the referees was also summarized and enclosed.
A revised manuscript with the correction sections red marked was attached as the supplemental material and for easy check/editing purpose.
Should you have any questions, please contact us without hesitate.
然後再附上Q/A，基本上囑條回答，寫的越多越好（老師語）。結果修改一次就接收了：）
我的回復，請老外幫忙修改了
Dear Editor:
Thank you for your kind letter of 「......」 on November **, 2005. We revised the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers』 comments, and carefully proof-read the manuscript to minimize typographical, grammatical, and bibliographical errors.
Here below is our description on revision according to the reviewers』 comments.
Part A (Reviewer 1)
1. The reviewer』s comment: ......
The authors』 Answer: .....
2. The reviewer』s comment: ......
The authors』 Answer: .....
...
...
Part B (Reviewer 2)
1. The reviewer』s comment: ......
The authors』 Answer: .....
2. The reviewer』s comment: ......
The authors』 Answer: .....
...
...
Many grammatical or typographical errors have been revised.
All the lines and pages indicated above are in the revised manuscript.
Thank you and all the reviewers for the kind advice.
Sincerely yours,
***
一個回復的例子(已接收)
Major comments:
1. The authors need to strengthen their results by including MMP secretion, and tran-matrigel migration by a positive control progenitor cell population i.e. enriched human CD34 cells obtained from mobilized PBL, since this is a more clinically relevant source of CD34 cells which has also been shown to secrete both MMP-9 and MMP-2 (ref. 11). CD34 enriched cells from steady state peripheral blood which also secrete MMPs are also of interest.
2. In fig 1C please specify which cell line represents MMP-negative cells. This needs to be clarified, as well as a better explanation of the method of the protocol.
3. The ELISA results are represented as "fold increase" compared to control. Instead, we suggest that standards should be used and results should be presented as absolute concentrations and only then can these results be compared to those of the zymography.
4. When discussing the results, the authors should distinguish clearly between spontaneous migration vs chemotactic migration. Furthermore, the high spontaneous migration obtained with cord blood CD34 cells should be compared to mobilized PBL CD34 enriched cells and discussed.
5. The authors claim that the clonogenic assay was performed to determine the optimum concentration for inhibition of MMP activity by phenanthroline and anti MMP-9 mAb, however they should clarify that this assay can only determine the toxicity of the inhibitors and not their optimal inhibitory concentrations.
Minor comments:
1. There are many spelling and syntax errors, especially in the results and discussion, which need correction.
a. Of special importance, is the percent inhibition of migration, which is described as percent of migration. i.e. pg 7:"Migration of CB CD34 was reced to 73.3%?" Instead should read "Migration of CB CD34 was reced by 73.3%?"
b. The degree symbol needs to be added to the numbers in Materials and methods.
2. It would be preferable to combine figure 1A and B, in order to confirm the reliability of fig. 1B by a positive control (HT1080).
Answer to referee 1 comment:
1. Mobilized peripheral blood is a more clinical source of CD34+ cells, so it is necessary to compare the MMP-9 secretion and trans-migration ability of CB CD34+ cells with that of mobilized PB CD34+ cells. However, we couldn't obtain enough mobilized PB to separate PB CD34+ cells and determine the MMP-9 secretion and migration ability, so we couldn』t complement the study on PB CD34+ cells in this paper. Results obtained by Janowska-Wieczorek et al found that mobilized CD34+ cells in peripheral blood express MMP-9. Furthermore, Domenech』s study showed that MMP-9 secretion is involved in G-CSF inced HPC mobilization. Their conclusions have been added in the discussion. In our present study, our central conclusion from our data is that freshly isolated CD34+ stem/progenitor cells obtained from CB proce MMP-9.
2. MMP-9 negative cell used in fig 1C was Jurkat cell. In zymographic analysis, MMP-9 was not detected in the medium conditioned by Jurkat cell. To exclude that the contaminating cells may play a role in the observed MMP-9 proction, we screened the media conditioned by different proportion of CB mononuclear cells with MMP-9 negative cells by zymography. This result may be confusion. Actually, only by detecting the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB mononuclear cells (MNC)/ml (since the purities of CD34+ cell are more than 90%), it could exclude the MNC role. In the revised manuscript, we only detected MMP-9 activity and antigen level in the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB mononuclear cells (MNC)/ml. There is no MMP-9 secretion be detected in the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB MNC/ml. It excluded the possibility that the MMP-9 activity in CB CD34+ cells conditioned medium is e to the contamination by MNC.
3.In this revised paper, we have detected the MMP-9 antigen levels by using commercial specific ELISA kits (R&D System, sensitivity, 0.156ng/ml). Recombinant MMP-9 from R&D System was used as a standard. The results are expressed in the absolute concentration. The absolute concentration result has been added in the paper. As shown in Fig2, MMP-9 levels were detectable in both CB CD34+ cell conditioned medium and BM CD34+ cell conditioned medium. However, MMP-9 level was significantly higher in CB CD34+ cell conditioned medium than in BM CD34+ cell conditioned medium (0.406±0.133ng/ml versus 0.195±0.023ng/ml). Although gelatinolytic activity was not detected in media conditioned by CD34+ cells from BM, sensitivity of ELISA favors the detection of MMP-9 antigen in the BM CD34+.
4. In our study, to establish the direct link between MMP-9 and CB CD34+ cells migration, we only determined the role of MMP-9 in spontaneous migration of CB CD34+ cells, but not in chemotactic migration. Actually, regulation of hematopoietic stem cell migration, homing and anchorage of repopulation cells to the bone marrow involves a complex interplay between adhesion molecules, chemokines, cytokines and proteolytic enzymes. Results obtained by the groups of Voermans reveal that not only the spontaneous migration but also the SDF-1 inced migration of CB CD34+ cells is greatly increased in comparison to CD34+ cells from BM and peripheral blood.
5. CD34+ cells we obtained in each cord blood sample were very limited. It is not enough to screen the inhibitors concentrations to select the optimal inhibitory concentrations. In the blocking experiments, based on the concentrations used by others and the manufacturer's recommendation, we then determined the inhibitors concentrations by excluding the toxicity of the inhibitors in that concentration, which was determined by clonogenic assay.
Minor comments:
1.The spelling and syntax errors have been checked and corrected.
2.Since the results in figure 1A and B were obtained from two separated and parallel experiments, it is not fitness to combine two figures.
❹ 投稿信怎麼寫
Cover Letter 既投稿信，對於科研論文新手來說，不知該如何下手，而對於論文老司機來說，重視程度普遍比較低。查爾斯沃思論文潤色在往期的文章中多次介紹過投稿信的重要性（參見《投稿信的重要性》），投稿信可以告訴雜志及其編輯為什麼他們應該考慮你的文章。這是特別重要的，因為當初審編輯在篩選你的論文時，就此決定是否在同行評審環節中尋找特定的專家，所以期刊歡迎增加對你研究的簡要總結。
不同的期刊對投稿信的要求各不相同，例如有的雜志會要求推薦幾位審稿人。一般會在雜志的作者指南（guide for authors）中看到具體的要求。許多作者並沒有注意到投稿信的重要性，即便它的重要性已經成為常識問題。有些作者甚至對此有一些誤解。
投稿信應包含哪些內容？這一問題在《投稿信的重要性》中已經有給出了詳細的說明，在此再次強調一下，除了一些基本信息外，最主要的是把該篇論文的研究重點及學術貢獻、創意簡潔的強調下。
我們也為大家准備了一個通用模板，供作者參考，該模板來自SPIE：
[Your Name]
[Your Affiliation]
[Your Address]
[Date]
Dear Dr.[Editor name],
I/We wish to submit a new manuscript entitled 「[title of article]」 for consideration by the [journal name].
I/We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.
In this paper, I/we report on . This is significant because . The paper should be of interest to readers in the areas of .
[Please explain in your own words the significance and novelty of the work, the problem that is being addressed, and why the manuscript belongs in this journal. Do not simply insert your abstract into your cover letter! Briefly describe the research you are reporting in your paper, why it is important, and why you think the readership of the journal would be interested in it.]
Please address all correspondence concerning this manuscript to me at [email address].
Thank you for your consideration of this manuscript.
Sincerely,
[Yourname]
❺ 給雜志社投稿怎麼寫郵件正文
首先，在郵件的正題內里一般要標明：投稿（有的人是提建議啊什麼的，這樣便於編輯區分！）、投稿的欄目（如果你很熟悉那本雜志，或者那本雜志的徵稿訊息很詳細，肯定是要標明欄目，這一點是加印象分的關鍵！）還有就是作品名稱（便於日後編輯找到你的稿子）。以上是最基本的三要素。
然後就是正文了，一般可以加一些問候之類的言語，但不要太多。粘貼文章（註：一般都把自己的文章直接粘貼在正文中，沒有特殊要求，不要以附件形式發送。還有，要以簡朴為主，不要搞什麼信紙啊，插圖啊）
最後，在末尾留下你的聯系方式，一般採用這個格局：
真名： 筆名：
地址：
郵編：
郵箱:
QQ：
（越詳細越好）
這樣，編輯就可以很方便的在人山人海中找到聯系你的方式了！
❻ 請別人積極投稿要用什麼敬詞
請別人積極投稿，你可以用敬詞，你可以這樣表達的，尊敬的同學，請你們積極投稿，有豐富的獎品等你們來參加
❼ 寫一則宣傳語,鼓勵同學積極投稿
相信自己，鼓勵自己，超越自己。為太陽的光輝在添上永恆的一筆！來顯示你的才華，來展示你的風采，來比拼你的實力！！賞五湖四海，讀天下文章，歡迎大家踴躍投稿！！
❽ 如果私信投稿語氣激動無禮質疑,不理解者你會如何回復
我一般都會選擇不理會
❾ 如何回復審稿人關於語言方面的問題
1、所有問題必須逐條回答。
2、盡量滿足意見中需要補充的實驗。
3、滿足不了的也不要迴避，說明不能做的合理理由。
4、審稿人推薦的文獻一定要引用，並討論透徹。
5、對於審稿人提出要補充的實驗，如果不是非做不可的，還是可以進行解釋。有時審稿人即使想接受你的文章，總還要提出一些不足之處，如果文章沒有那些不足之處，也許文章就會投給更高的雜志了。所以，如果你真的不想補充實驗或者補充很困難，可以合理的解釋，一般沒問題的。