SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全尊敬的审稿人：非常感谢您对我们的稿件给予了宝贵的指导意见和建设性的批评。
我们已经认真阅读并且针对您的意见进行了修改，现在向您提交修改后的版本，希望能够满足您的要求。
以下是我们对每一条意见的具体回答和修改情况：回答1：感谢审稿人对研究方法的关注。
我们在修改后的版本中已经全面描述了论文的研究方法，并提供了详细的解释。
我们进一步完善了实验设计，并添加了实验步骤、数据处理和分析方法等细节，以确保论文的可靠性和可重复性。
回答2：感谢审稿人对文献支持的指导。
我们在修改后的版本中已经增加了更多的文献引用，并且通过对现有文献的分析和讨论，进一步加深了对研究问题的理解和认知。
我们相信这些新的引用将能够增强论文的学术价值和可信度。
回答3：感谢审稿人对语法和表达问题的指导。
我们在修改后的版本中仔细检查了论文的语法和表达，并进行了适当的修改和润色。
我们相信这些修改将会使论文更加清晰易读，增强论文的表达效果。
回答4：感谢审稿人对实验数据解释的意见。
我们已根据您的建议重新阐述和说明了相关数据的结果。
我们补充了对数据的详细分析和解释，并进一步讨论了数据与论文研究问题之间的关系。
我们相信这些改善将能够使读者更好地理解和评估论文的实验数据。
意见5：论文结构和框架需要进一步完善，以提升论文的逻辑性和连贯性。
回答5：感谢审稿人对论文结构和框架的指导。
我们在修改后的版本中对论文的结构和框架进行了进一步完善，以提升论文的逻辑性和连贯性。
我们重新组织了论文的章节顺序，增加了合适的标题和副标题，并提供了更清晰明了的段落和段落间的过渡。
我们相信这些修改将使论文的结构更加紧凑和清晰。
再次感谢您对我们的审稿意见和建议。
我们真诚希望通过我们的修改和努力，能够满足您的需求和要求。
如果还有其他问题或建议，请随时向我们提出。
谢谢您的时间和耐心阅读！顺祝工作顺利！此致。
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全修改稿回答审稿人的意见（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 corr ections 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 t his 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以下是审稿人意见和本人的回复。
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全57745
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板大全修改稿回答审稿人的意见（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 corr ections 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 t his 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以下是审稿人意见和本人的回复。
sci审稿意见回复模板 -回复
sci审稿意见回复模板-回复【sci审稿意见回复模板】以中括号内的内容为主题，写一篇1500-2000字文章，一步一步回答【引言】尊敬的编辑，非常感谢您对我们提交的科研论文的认真审稿和宝贵意见。
我们在本文中将一步一步解答您提出的问题，并对您的建议进行逐个回复。
【问题一】您在审稿意见中提到了XXX，请作者详细解释原因。
【回答问题一】非常感谢您对我们研究中的XXX问题的关注。
我们认真回复如下：XXX是我们研究的一个重要方面，由于特殊的实验条件/数据收集问题/方法限制，我们在论文中所给的解释可能欠缺充分。
在未来的研究中，我们将进一步深入探讨XXX的原因，并提供更详细的解释。
【问题二】您提到在我们的研究中存在一些方法上的不足，感觉方案存在潜在的问题，请作者解释或改进。
【回答问题二】我们非常感谢您对我们的方法进行了仔细的审查。
我们认真考虑了您的意见，并经过进一步的探讨，我们决定采纳您的建议并进行改进。
我们将在下一个版本的论文中，对现有方法进行更详细的描述，并加入对可能存在的潜在问题的讨论。
我们还会进行更多的实验，以充分验证我们的方案的有效性和可靠性。
【问题三】您对我们研究中的统计分析方法提出了一些疑问，请作者进行解释。
【回答问题三】感谢您对我们论文中的统计分析方法进行了详细的评估。
我们认真考虑了您的意见，并经过再次验证，我们发现在某一个具体的环节确实存在一些问题。
我们将在下一个版本的论文中，加入更多的详细统计数据和分析结果，以充分支持我们的结论，并对相关的统计分析方法进行更深入的解释和讨论。
同时，我们将请相关领域的专家参与，以确保我们的统计方法的可信度和准确性。
【问题四】您对我们研究的创新点提出了质疑，请作者解释并提供更多实证支持。
【回答问题四】非常感谢您对我们研究的创新点进行评价和质疑。
我们理解您的担忧，并将采纳您的建议来加强我们的创新点。
我们将在下一个版本的论文中，加入更多的实证支持材料，包括额外的实验数据、模型验证结果等，以更充分地展示我们的创新点的可行性和有效性。
sci审稿人回复意见
sci审稿人回复意见英文回答：Thank you for your thoughtful review and helpful suggestions. We have carefully considered your comments and made the following revisions to our manuscript:1. In the Introduction, we have expanded our discussion of relevant literature to include the studies you suggested. We have also added a more detailed explanation of our research question and its significance in the field.2. In the Methods section, we have provided more information about our data collection and analysis procedures. We have also clarified our inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study participants.3. In the Results section, we have added a table that summarizes the key findings of our study. We have also included additional figures and graphs to illustrate ourresults more clearly.4. In the Discussion section, we have addressed the potential limitations of our study and discussed the implications of our findings for future research. We have also added a more detailed conclusion that summarizes our main findings and their significance.We believe that these revisions have significantly improved the quality of our manuscript. We are grateful for your constructive feedback and guidance.中文回答：感谢您提供的周到审阅和宝贵建议。
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板
Dear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Realtime Monitoring of Xylitol Fermentation by Micro-Raman Spectroscopy”(LANL-2014-0001). 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 ma in corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:Responds to the reviewer’s comments:1. Response to comment (Reviewer 1): (The proposed method was established with the lack of the process of the optimization. The curve was adopted to illustrate the changes of absorption peak in the process of fermentation, but the absorption peak couldn’t be confirmed the identical to the reference peak of xylitol. It needs more data to prove the reliability of the method)Response: C onsidering the Reviewer’s suggestion, the experiment of high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) is added to verify the reliability of the Raman data. Raman paek is a kind of inelastic scattering paek（not absorption peak）, Raman spectrum of the standard xylitol and xylose solutions was uesd to selecte the most appropriate characteristic bands of xylitol and xylose for our experiment based on their comparative strength without overlap with other bands.2. Response to comment(Reviewer 1): (The literature data(table 1) was used inthis paper, but different shifts and strength would be obtained using different Raman spectrometers, so data shall be carried out according to the experimental results in the support of literature.)Response: different experimental conditions has a great influence on the peak intensity. but little effect on the peak raman shift, This is the basis of the Raman qualitative.3. Response to comment(Reviewer 1): (The references shows different styles.)Response:The format of the reference has been corrected.4. Response to comment(Reviewer 2): (The medium is a complex mixture and includes yeast extract. Y east extract will contain many of the characteristic Raman peaks that the authors ascribe to the yeast cells.)Response:every sample of yeast cells pallet had been washed twice（suspension and centrifugation）to ensure impurity elimination, in addition , yeast extract is obtained after plasmolysis and complete hydrolase autolyzed, remove the cell wall and insoluble productsaccording to the production process of yeast extract. so the process for purifing the yeast cells pallet is reasonable.5. Response to comment(Reviewer 2): ( The spectral resolution is stated to be 1.2 cm-1; however, the spectra are smoothed....No details of the smoothing algorithm used are provided. This affects the spectral resolution.. )Response:we added the processing methods of Raman spectra in section of Data analysis.6. Response to comment(Reviewer 2): (In Figure 3, the peak at 866 cm-1 .....into xylulose via xylitol as intermediate." (page 7 lines 21 to 32))Response:We try to correct the deficiencies in this passage. We think this is necessary to theoretically verify the Raman consistent with the fact that we know. Also ralate to the discussion on the by-products.8. Response to comment(Reviewer 3): ( It is said that inorganic salt is an important factor for the fermentation process (Page 3, line 36), but there is no discuss or exploration about this)Response: inorganic salt is an important factor for the fermentation process，but the effect of inorganic salt is not the focus of the article，the concentration of inorganic salt is adjusted to the most suitable conditions for this strain according to the reference.9. Response to comment(Reviewer 3): (Figure 4 was used to illustrate the changes of biological macromolecules, but all the Raman peaks here were not clear) Response:Figure in the first draft of the paper has a problem in the export size by Origin8.5，and we have modified the size of resubmitted figure to ensure better view of peak.10. Response to comment(Reviewer 3): (The assignment of bands in table 1 all depended on lectures.)Response:The Raman characteristic bands of biological macromolecular are common-sense conclusion in this field, in fact, almost all articles involved biological Raman bands of Biological macromolecule have direct quoted these conclusions. three examples were list as below :Schuster K C, Urlaub E and Gapes J R. 2000. Single-cell analysis of bacteria by Raman microscopy: spectral information on the chemical composition of cells and on the heterogeneity in a culture. Journal of microbiological methods. 42(1): 29-38.Başar G, Kın S. 2008. Monitoring of spectroscopic changes of a single trapped fission yeast cell by using a Raman tweezers set-up. Optics Communications. 281(19): 4998-5003.Xie C, Li Y. 2003. Confocal micro-Raman spectroscopy of single biological cells using optical trapping and shifted excitation difference techniques. Journal of Applied Physics. 93(5): 2982-2986.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 revised paper.We appreciate for Editors/Revie wers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.Y oursSincerelyZhen Huang。
sci修回意见回复模板
sci修回意见回复模板感谢您对我们研究的关注，并提出宝贵意见。
以下是我们针对您的建议给出的回复：1.首先，非常感谢您对我们研究的认可。
2.您指出的这个问题确实值得我们深入研究。
3.我们会认真考虑您提出的意见，并将其纳入我们的研究范畴。
4.您提到的这个观点与我们的研究目标高度契合。
5.感谢您的反馈，我们会将其作为进一步优化的方向。
6.我们会充分利用您的建议，提高我们研究的质量和深度。
7.您的提议非常中肯，我们会充分考虑并给出明确的回应。
8.感谢您对我们研究成果的反馈，这对我们来说非常重要。
9.我们会着重分析您提出的问题，以取得更好的研究结果。
10.您提供的信息对我们的研究具有重要的指导作用。
11.我们会在今后的研究中详细探究您提到的这个点。
12.您的意见很有启发性，我们将在研究过程中加以考虑。
13.您提到的这个观点确实需要进一步研究，我们会全力以赴。
14.对于您的建议，我们会及时修正和完善相应内容。
15.我们会通过实验和数据分析来验证您的观点。
16.您的建议给了我们很好的想法，我们会尽快实施。
17.感谢您提供的新的研究视角，我们会深入探索。
18.您的建议对于我们研究的深度和广度具有重要意义。
19.我们愿意与您进一步合作，以推进相关研究的进展。
20.对您提供的数据分析方法，我们会进行实际应用和验证。
21.在研究中融入您提到的观点，能够更好地解答问题。
22.针对您的建议，我们将制定相应的研究方案。
23.正是因为您提出的问题，我们的研究才会更加全面。
24.您的观点对于扩展我们研究的范围非常有帮助。
25.我们会根据您的建议调整我们的研究设计。
26.您给出的参考文献将对我们的研究提供有力支持。
27.对您提供的背景信息，我们会充分考虑并融入研究。
28.您的观点有助于我们更全面地了解研究对象。
29.我们会关注您提到的相关工作，以避免重复研究。
30.对于您提到的未来研究方向，我们会加以关注。
31.感谢您对我们研究的评价和建议，这对我们非常重要。
SCI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板
SCI修正稿答复审稿人看法范文模板修正稿答复审稿人的看法（最主要的部分）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: (……扼要列出看法……)Response: ××××××2. Response to comment: (……扼要列出看法……)Response: ××××××......逐条看法答复,切忌必定不克不及有漏掉针对不合的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可恰当用用：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 ……最后特意感激一下这个审稿人的看法：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以下是审稿人看法和本身的答复.与大家分享.从中可以看出,这位审稿人卖力读了文章,提出许多珍贵的看法.这些看法散布在文章的各个地方.我很惊奇有人真正读了我的文章.看到这些看法,我认为很感激,不是因为吸收文章的原因,而是这些看法能真正有助于进步文章的质量.从中还看出,答复审稿人问题的“技能”.对于答复问题,有的人就是一味辩驳,却不加改良.记得ACS Style Guide里面说,当审稿人问到问题的,哪怕是他懂得错误,这也解释作者这么写,其他读者也会懂得错误,引起歧义.是以,作者就是要修正句子,使表达不引起歧义.是以：有时光一味辩驳,还不如指出具体改良在第几页.第几段.============================================Reviewers' comments:Reviewer #3: While revising the script, it is to be suggested that author should clearly indicate the aim & scope of the study and while making conclusion, it is to be mentioned how the study is useful for the practical purposes. In addition the following are the few suggestions/comments, which may be included while revision.1. Introduction part first para last line, author must avoid to write ambiguous statement i.e., much work is still ahead, may indicate properly.2. Author could not demonstrate the reason why, to select the organic compound such as ethyl pyruvate for this study?3. Experimental part: It is difficult to understand the in-situ RAIRS experiments with homemade liquid-solidRAIRS cell. More detailed information may be useful for the others those who are working in the area. Photograph of the assembled cell may be included.4. The description given for the experimental set up (page 4) can be presented by flow diagram instead, as an ease to understand the set up.5. Resluts Part (Page 6): "CO adlayers with identical monolayer coverages", the monolayer coverage, is it been performed with some adsorption model? Further, it was suggested that CO-saturated Pt surface, but not mentioned about the saturation experiments. Is it obtained after 60 min of CO bubbling?6. Page 12, 2nd para: The displacement of EtPy by CCl4 flushing, is it confirmed by the EtPy peaks? If so, it has to be mentioned clearly in the para. Also in the same para, author referred for Fig. 7a and 7b but in the figures, it didn't appear, only figure 7 appeared. I feel it refers for figure 7, portion A and B, to be corrected. Similarly, in the text referred the fig 2a, 2b. etc but on the figure sheet it is mentioned as 2A, 2B .etc. to be corrected.7. Page 14, 1st para: 'contamination of the Ptsurface by corrosion of o-rings in high concentration EtPy', but the statement has not been supported by other evidence/literature.8. Pages 14 through 17: the observed reactivity of various solvents for adsorbed CO on the Pt surface (figs 3 & 4) has to be discussed more precisely. This reviewer is unable to follow the reason why they showed different reactivity, is it principally due to the organic moieties, or due to the impurities of commercially available chemicals or a mixed effect. It has to be clearly demonstrated, however, the only experiment performed with CO/water? CCl4 would difficult to describe it in detail.9. The author try to restrain with repeated arguments in the text e.g., page 3 para 1: It was generalized that........., also appeared on page 21 first para.10. Captions of the figures are too long, the detailed description already given in the text, hence would not be included here. Captions should be short and crispy.===============================================Dear Editor,I quite appreciate your favorite consideration andthe reviewer’s insightful comments. Now I have revised the JCIS-06-247 exactly according to the reviewer’s comments, and found these comments are very helpful. I hope this revision can make my paper more acceptable. The revisions were addressed point by point below.[general] The objective of this research was added at the beginning of the third paragraph of Introduction. How the study is useful for practical purposes was added at the end of Conclusion as one paragraph.[1] Ambiguous statement i.e., “much work is still ahead” was deleted.[2] Ethyl pyruvate was used here as a typical compound (containing two carbonyl groups) to demonstrate the feasibility of using our diagnosing tool to detect low-coverage CO (coming from decarbonylation of EtPy) at the liquid-solid interface. EtPy is a reactant used in liquid-phase chiral catalysis, and slight decomposition of EtPy to adsorbed CO was reported to influence the catalytic performance. In addition, by studying that, we can directly compare our results with previous studies. More details in the first paragraph of Section 3.2.[3] The IR cell was designed according to the IRcells used by many electrochemical workers. References were added. A photo was given in the Supporting Information.[4] A flow diagram of the experimental setup was given in the new Fig. 1.[5] The CO adsorption experiments were performed in the same adsorption mode, by bubbling CO through a clean Pt surface in different days to achieve the same saturation coverage of CO. Initial experiments indicated that given the CO bubbling rate was 0.85 cm3/min, CO can saturate on Pt after 30-45 min. We bubble CO for 60 min to guarantee the same CO coverage. If we bubble CO for more time, or if we increase the CO flowing rate several times, the CO saturation coverage doesn’t change, indicating 60 min is already enough. A figure showing the CO uptake as a function of bubbling time was given in the Supporting Information.[6] The displacement of EtPy by CCl4 was confirmed by the removing of EtPy peaks. The mention of Fig. 7a and 7b etc. throughout the text were all corrected.[7] It is known that some solvents such as acetone can corrode the Viton o-ring. We saw the damage of o-ringafter using high-concentration EtPy. A reference to the Viton o-ring information was given.[8] The observed reactivity trend is due to a combination of both effects, with the accumulation of organic moieties on Pt surface during numerous flushing cycles the more important reason. A few proper sentences were added to clarity this point.[9] The repeated arguments in the first paragraph in Section 4.3 were deleted.[10] The too-long captions were significantly shortened.In all, I found the reviewer’s comments are quite helpful, and I revised my paper point-by-point. Thank you and the review again for your help!==============================================成果：迎接阅读：Organic Chemistry on Solid Surfaces (Review)Z. Ma, F. Zaera*, Surface Scence Reports 61 (2006) 229-281.ScienceDirect TOP25 Hottest Articles in ChemistryCI修正稿答复审稿人看法范文模板修正稿答复审稿人的看法（最主要的部分）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 comment s are as flowing:Responds to the reviewer’s comments:Reviewer #1:1. Response to comment: (……扼要列出看法……)Response: ××××××2. Response to comment: (……扼要列出看法……)Response: ××××××......逐条看法答复,切忌必定不克不及有漏掉针对不合的问题有下列几个礼貌术语可恰当用用：We are very sorry for our negl igence 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 s uggested that……Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we have ……最后特意感激一下这个审稿人的看法：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. L ine 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.。
- 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)。
SCI 修改稿回答審稿人意見範文模板大全修改稿回答審稿人①意見（最重要①部分）List of ResponsesDear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers' comments concerning our manuscriptentitled “Paper Title” （ID: 文章稿號）. Those comments are all valuable and very helpfulfor 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 corer ctions in the paperand the responds to the reviewer are as flowing:s co Responds to the reviewer ' s comments:Reviewer #1:1.Response to comment：・（•…簡要歹U出意見）Respo nse: xxxxxx2.Response to comment: •（…簡要歹U出意見.）Response: xxxxxx。
逐條意見回答，切忌一定不能有遺漏針對不同①問題有下列幾個禮貌術語可適當用用：We are very sorry for our negligenee of .. ...We are very sorry for our in correct writi ng ... ...It is really true as Reviewer suggested that ...We have made correction according to the Reviewer 's comments.We have re-written htis part according to the Reviewer 's suggestionAs Reviewer suggested that ...Considering the Reviewer ' s suggestion, we have ....最後特意感謝一下這個審稿人①意見：Special thanks to you for your good comments.Reviewer #2:同上述Reviewer #3:XXXXXXOther changes:1.Line 6061, the stateme nts of “.. ”were corrected as “•…2.Line 107, “. ”was added3.Line 129, “……”was deletedXXXXXXWe 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 appreciatefor 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以下是審稿人意見和本人①回複。
與大家分享從中可以看出，這位審稿人認真讀了文章，提出很多寶貴①意見。
這些意見分布在文章①各個地方。
我很詫異有人真正讀了我①文章。
看到這些意見，我覺得很感激，不是因為接收文章①原因，而是這些意見能真正有助於提高文章①質量。
從中還看出，回答審稿人問題技巧”。
對於回答問題，有①人就是一味反駁，卻不加改進。
記得ACS Style Guide裏面說，當審稿人問到問題①，哪怕是他理解錯誤，這也說明作者這麼寫，其他讀者也會理解錯誤，引起歧義。
因此，作者就是要修改句子，使表達不引起歧義。
因此：有時間一味反駁，還不如指出具體改進在第幾頁、第幾段。
Reviewers' comments:Reviewer #3: While revising the script, it is to be suggestedthat author should clearly indicate the aim & scope of the study and while making conclusion,it is to be mentioned how the study is useful for the practical purposes. In addition the following are the few suggestions/comments, which may be included while revision.1.Introduction part first para last line, author must avoid to write ambiguous statementi.e., much work is still ahead, may indicate properly.2.Author could not demonstrate the reason why, to select the organic compound such as ethyl pyruvate for this study?3.Experimental part: It is difficult to understand the in-situ RAIRS experiments with homemade liquid-solid RAIRS cell. More detailed information may be useful for the others those who are working in the area. Photograph of the assembledcell may be included.4.The description given for the experimental set up (page 4) can be presented by flow diagram instead, as an ease to understand the set up.5.Resluts Part (Page 6): "CO adlayerswith identical monolayer coverages",the monolayer coverage, is it been performed with some adsorption model? Further, it was suggestedthat CO-saturated Pt surface, but not mentioned about the saturation experiments. Is it obtained after 60 min of CO bubbling?6.Page 12, 2nd para: The displacement of EtPy by CCl4 flushing, is it confirmed by the EtPy peaks? If so, it has to be mentioned clearly in the para. Also in the same para, author referred for Fig. 7a and 7b but in the figures, it didn't appear, only figure 7 appeared. I feel it refers for figure 7, portion A and B, to be corrected. Similarly, in the text referred the fig 2a, 2b. etc but on the figure sheet it is mentioned as 2A, 2B .etc. to be corrected.7.Page 14, 1st para: 'contamination of the Pt surface by corrosion of o-rings in high concentration EtPy', but the statement has not been supported by other evidence/literature.8.Pages 14 through 17: the observed reactivity of various solvents for adsorbed CO on the Pt surface (figs 3 & 4) has to be discussed more precisely. This reviewer is unable to follow the reason why they showed different reactivity, is it principally due to the organic moieties, or due to the impurities of commercially available chemicals or a mixed effect. It has to be clearly demonstrated, however, the only experiment performed with CO/water? CCl4 would difficult to describe it in detail.9.The author try to restrain with repeated arguments in the text e.g., page 3 para 1: It was generalized that ..... , also appeared on page 21 first para.10.Captions of the figures are too long, the detailed description already given in thetext, hence would not be included here. Captions should be short and crispy.Dear Editor,I quite appreciate your favorite consideration and the reviewer 'inssightful comments. Now I have revised the JCIS-06-247 exactly according to the reviewer 's comments, and found these comments are very helpful. I hope this revision can make my paper more acceptable. The revisions were addressed point by point below.[general] The objective of this researchwas added at the beginning of the third paragraph of Introduction. How the study is useful for practical purposes was added at the end of Conclusion as one paragraph.[1]Ambiguous statement i.e., “ much work is still ahead ” was deleted.[2]Ethyl pyruvate was used here as a typical compound (containing two carbonyl groups) to demonstrate the feasibility of using our diagnosing tool to detect low-coverage CO (comingfrom decarbonylation of EtPy) at the liquid-solid interface. EtPy is a reactant used inliquid-phase chiral catalysis,and slight decomposition of EtPy to adsorbed CO was reported to influence the catalytic performance. In addition, by studying that, we can directly compareour results with previous studies. More details in the first paragraph of Section 3.2.[3]The IR cell was designed according to the IR cells used by many electrochemicalworkers. References were added. A photo was given in the Supporting Information.[4]A flow diagram of the experimental setup was given in the new Fig. 1.[5]The CO adsorption experiments were performed in the same adsorption mode, by bubblingCO through a clean Pt surface in different days to achieve the same saturation coverage of CO. Initial experiments indicated that given the CO bubbling rate was 0.85 cm3/min, CO cansaturate on Pt after 30-45 min. We bubble CO for 60 min to guarantee the same CO coverage. Ifwe bubble CO for more time, or if we increase the CO flowing rate several times, the COsaturation coverage doesnt change, i 60 min is alreadyenough. A figure showing the CO uptake as a function of bubblingtime was given in the Supporting Information.[6]The displacementof EtPy by CCl4 was confirmed by the removing of EtPy peaks. Themention of Fig. 7a and 7b etc. throughout the text were all corrected.[7]It is known that some solvents such as acetone can corrode the Viton o-ring. We saw the damage of o-ring after using high-concentration EtPy. A reference to the Viton o-ring information was given.[8]The observed reactivity trend is due to a combination of both effects, with the accumulation of organic moieties on Pt surface during numerous flushing cyclesthe more important reason. A few proper sentences were added to clarity this point.[9]The repeated arguments in the first paragraph in Section 4.3 were deleted.[10]The too-long captions were significantly shortened.In all, I found the reviewer ' s comments are quite helpful, and I revised my paperpoint-by-point. Thank you and the review again for your help!結果：/10.1016/j.jcis.2006.09.005歡迎瀏覽:Orga nic Chemistry on Solid Surfaces (Review)乙 Ma, F. Zaera*, Surface Sce nee Reports 61 (2006) 229-281. Scie nceDirect TOP25 Hottest Articles in Chemistry/10.1016/j.surfrep.2006.03.001CI 修改稿回答審稿人意見範文模板修改稿回答審稿人①意見（最重要①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: 文章稿號）. 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 are as flowing:Responds to the reviewer ' s comments:Reviewer #1:1.Response to comment：・（•…簡要歹U出意見）Respo nse: xxxxxx2.Response to comment: •（…簡要歹U出意見.）Response: xxxxxx。