投稿、审稿以及修改稿件时的常用句型
英语作文关于投稿经常用的句子

英语作文关于投稿经常用的句子Sure, here are some common sentences used when submitting a manuscript or article for publication:
1. Thank you for considering my manuscript for publication.
2. I believe that my article would be a great fit for your publication.
3. I have attached my manuscript for your review.
4. I would appreciate any feedback or suggestions for improvement.
5. I am excited about the possibility of having my work published in your esteemed journal.
6. Please let me know if there are any specific formatting or submission guidelines that I need to follow.
当投稿时,常用的句子包括:
1. 感谢您考虑发表我的稿件。
2. 我相信我的文章会很适合发表在您的刊物上。
3. 我已经附上了我的稿件供您审阅。
4. 我会感激任何反馈或改进建议。
5. 我对我的作品有可能在贵刊上发表感到非常兴奋。
6. 请告诉我是否有任何特定的格式或投稿指南需要遵循。
英文审稿人常用语大全

英文审稿人常用语大全英文审稿人在审阅稿件时常用的一些语言包括:1. "The manuscript is well-written and the arguments are clearly presented."2. "The author has effectively addressed the reviewers' comments and concerns."3. "The paper would benefit from a more thorough discussion of the methodology."4. "The conclusions drawn in the manuscript are well supported by the data."5. "The author should consider revising theintroduction to provide a clearer context for the study."6. "The language and grammar used in the manuscript need to be improved for clarity."7. "The paper would benefit from additional referencesto support the arguments."8. "The results presented in the manuscript are consistent with previous findings in the field."9. "The manuscript would benefit from a more in-depth analysis of the results."10. "The organization of the paper could be improved to enhance the flow of the arguments."这些是审稿人在审阅稿件时常用的一些语言,用于表达对文章内容、结构、语言表达等方面的评价和建议。
中文文章审稿通用语言

中文文章审稿通用语言摘要:1.引言2.中文文章审稿的重要性3.审稿过程中的通用语言4.审稿中需要注意的方面5.结论正文:引言中文文章审稿是保证文章质量的重要环节,它涉及到对文章结构、内容、语言、逻辑等方面的全面审查。
作为一名中文知识类写作助理,熟练掌握中文文章审稿的通用语言是必不可少的技能。
本文将详细介绍中文文章审稿的通用语言以及审稿过程中需要注意的方面。
一、中文文章审稿的重要性中文文章审稿是保证文章质量的关键环节,对于提升文章的可读性、权威性和影响力具有重要意义。
通过审稿,可以发现文章中的不足之处,对文章进行修改和完善,使之更加符合读者的需求和兴趣。
同时,审稿还有助于发现潜在的错误和问题,避免因错误或不准确的信息给读者带来误导。
二、审稿过程中的通用语言在审稿过程中,通常需要用到以下几种通用语言:1.术语:审稿过程中需要用到一些专业术语,如“论证严密”、“资料充实”、“观点新颖”等,以便准确地评价文章的各个方面。
2.标点符号:正确使用标点符号是保证文章表达清晰、准确的基本要求。
在审稿过程中,应特别注意文章中标点符号的使用是否规范。
3.数字:在文章中,数字的使用也是一个重要的方面。
应确保数字的准确性,同时注意数字的表达方式是否符合规范。
三、审稿中需要注意的方面在审稿过程中,应注意以下几个方面:1.结构:检查文章的结构是否合理,包括引言、正文和结论等部分的安排是否恰当。
2.内容:审查文章的内容是否充实、有价值,观点是否新颖、有独到之处。
3.语言:关注文章的语言表达是否流畅、简练,用词是否准确,语言风格是否符合文章的性质和目的。
4.逻辑:确保文章的论述逻辑清晰、严密,论证是否有力。
5.文献引用:检查文章中引用的文献是否规范,引文是否准确。
四、结论总之,作为一名中文知识类写作助理,熟练掌握中文文章审稿的通用语言和方法,对于提高文章质量和保证文章的可读性具有重要意义。
投稿过程中常见的英文

投稿过程中常见的英文以下总结的是投稿过程中常见的英文(上传者注:来源于卓虎学术)1.Cover Letter 投稿信,一般包括一段文字,说明文章的重要性2.Submitted to Journal 刚提交的状态3.Manuscript received by Editorial Office 或者Notification of Manuscript Receipt就是你的文章到了编辑手里了,证明投稿成功4.With editor如果在投稿的时候没有要求选择编辑,就先到主编那,主编会分派给别的编辑。
这当中就会有另两个状态:3.1 Awaiting Editor Assignment指派责任编辑Editor assigned 是把文章分给一个编辑处理。
3.2. Editor Declined Invitation 如果编辑接手处理了就会邀请审稿人了。
5.The Editors have determined that your manuscript does not fall within the scope of the journal.在编辑的初步筛选就没通过了。
6.随后也会有2种状态4.1. Decision Letter Being Prepared 如果投稿后很快就出现这个状态,就是编辑不找审稿人就自己决定了,一般来说,可能是:1)英文太差,编辑让修改。
2)内容太差,要拒了。
4.2. Reviewer(s) invited /with referees文章已经交给审稿人审稿了。
7.Under review 这应该是一个漫长的等待。
当然前面各步骤也可能很慢的,要看编辑的处理情况。
如果被邀请审稿人不想审,就会decline,编辑会重新邀请别的审稿人。
8.Required Reviews Completed 审稿人的意见已上传,审稿结束,等待编辑决定9.Evaluating Recommendation 评估审稿人的意见,随后你将收到编辑给你的decision 10.Revision and subsequent reevaluation of the manuscript 有机会修改总是好事!一般有两种情况:Minor revision/Major revision,这个时候可以稍微庆祝一下了,问题不大了,因为有修改就有可能。
sci审稿人常用话术-概述说明以及解释

sci审稿人常用话术-概述说明以及解释1.引言1.1 概述概述部分的内容可以是对整篇文章进行简要介绍和总结。
在此部分,可以提及sci审稿人常用话术的重要性、目前存在的问题以及对该话术进行深入分析和讨论的必要性。
针对sci审稿人常用话术这一主题,本文旨在探究其在科技论文审稿过程中的应用和影响。
与科技论文审稿相关的研究一直备受关注,而审稿人常用话术作为科技论文评估的关键要素之一,其对于作者和论文的影响必然不容忽视。
首先,审稿人常用话术是审稿过程中的重要工具之一,旨在提供全面、客观、具体的反馈意见和建议。
作为一名专家学者,审稿人在审阅科技论文时不仅需要具备丰富的学术知识,还需要用准确、明确的话语表达自己的想法,以便于作者理解和改进。
因此,审稿人常用话术的正确使用和准确把握对于保证审稿质量和提高学术交流效果至关重要。
然而,目前在科技论文审稿过程中,一些审稿人常用话术的表达存在一定问题。
例如,有些审稿人可能过于直接地提出批评意见,缺乏针对性的建议和指导;另一方面,有些审稿人可能过于委婉地回避问题,导致作者对于自身论文的不足没有清晰的认识。
这些问题影响着审稿过程的效率和科技论文的质量,亟需系统性的分析和解决。
因此,本文将就sci审稿人常用话术进行深入研究,旨在明确其使用的标准和原则,分析其中存在的问题及其原因,并提出相应的改进建议。
通过对这一话术进行详细剖析,我们希望能够为科技论文审稿提供更准确、更实用的评估和指导意见,推动学术交流向更高水平发展。
综上所述,本文旨在探讨sci审稿人常用话术在科技论文审稿中的应用,既分析了目前存在的问题,也对其改进和优化提出了思考。
通过深入研究和讨论,我们期望能够为科技论文审稿人提供有益的参考,推动科技论文的质量提升和学术交流的进步。
1.2文章结构文章结构是指文章内容的组织方式和顺序,不同的文章结构会对读者的阅读体验产生不同的影响。
在科技论文的审稿过程中,审稿人会根据文章的结构来评估其逻辑性和可读性。
SCI投稿信件的一些套话和模板

SCI投稿信件的一些套话和模板(From Internet)一、投稿信1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML:I am sending a manuscript. entitled “” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - .Yours sincerely2. Dear Dr. A:Enclosed is a manuscript. entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers.3. Dear Dr. A:Please find enclosed for your review an original researc h article, “” by sb. All authors have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers.二、询问有无收到稿件Dear Editors,We dispatched our manuscript. to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we will send our manuscript,again. Thank you in advance for your help.三、询问论文审查回音Dear Editors,It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript. (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.四、关于论文的总体审查意见1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest.A few minor revision are list below.2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below.3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as –4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.5. This manuscript. is not suitable for publication in the journal of –because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - .6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory.7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.8. The wording and style. of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined.9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays.10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used?五、给编辑的回信1. In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that –One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.2. I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3. Thank you for your letter of –and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript. entitled “”. We have studie d their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval.4. I enclosed a revised manuscript. which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed.5. We are sending the revised manuscript. according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript.7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript. is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.11. I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerni ng Figures 1 and 2 result froma misinterpretation of the data.12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available.13. We prefer to retain the use of Table 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.15. The running title has been changed to “”.16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2).19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript. is acceptable for publication.23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the revised manuscript. is now suitable for publication.24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper.25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees.。
投稿常用语

一、投稿信1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML:I am sending a manuscript entitled “” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - .Yours sincerely2. Dear Dr. A:Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for pu blication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers.3. Dear Dr. A:Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “” by sb. All author s have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers.二、询问有无收到稿件Dear Editors,We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.三、询问论文审查回音Dear Editors,It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.四、关于论文的总体审查意见1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest. A few minor revision are list below.2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below.3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as –4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of – because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - .6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory.7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined.9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays.10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used?五、给编辑的回信1. In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that –One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.2. I have r ead the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3. Thank you for your letter of –and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “”. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval.4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed.5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.11. I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available.13. We prefer to retain the use of Table 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.15. The running title has been changed to “”.16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2).19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication.24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper.25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees.。
投稿与编辑交流专用英语

一、最初投稿Cover letterDear Editors:We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled “Paper Title”, which we wish to be considered for publication in “Journal Name”. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and manuscript is a pproved by all authors for publication. I would like to declare on behalf of my co-authors that the work described was original research that has not been published previously, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere, in whole or in part. All the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed.In this work, we evaluated …… (简要介绍一下论文的创新性). I hope this paper is suitable for “Journal Name”.The following is a list of possible reviewers for your consideration:1) Name A E-mail: ××××@××××2) Name B E-mail: ××××@××××We deeply appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers. If you have any queries, please don’t hesitate to contact me at the address below.Thank you and best regards.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××@××××二、催稿信Dear Prof. ×××:Sorry for disturbing you. I am not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript titled “Paper Title”. (ID: 文章稿号), although the status of “With Editor” has been lasting for more than two mont hs, since submitted to journal three months ago. I am just wondering that my manuscript has been sent to reviewers or not?I would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time check the status for us.I am very pleased to hear from you on th e reviewer’s comments.Thank you very much for your consideration.Best regards!Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××@××××三、修改稿Cover letterDear Dr/ Prof..(写上负责你文章编辑的姓名,显得尊重,因为第一次的投稿不知道具体负责的编辑,只能用通用的Editors):On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive andconstructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Paper Title”. (ID: 文章稿号).We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in red in the paper. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.Thank you and best regards.Yours sincerely,××××××Corresponding author:Name: ×××E-mail: ××××@××××四、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 corrections in the pap er 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: ××××××。
- 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)。
投稿、审稿以及修改稿件时的常用句型一、投稿时的Cover latter1). Here within enclosed is our paper for consideration to be published on "(Journal name)". The further information about the paper is in the following:The Title: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXThe Authors: XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXThe authors claim that none of the material in the paper has been published or is under consideration for publication elsewhere.I am the corresponding author and my address and other information is as follows: Address: Department of XXXXXXXXX,College of Chemistry and Enviromental Science, Henan Normal UniversityXinxiang City, Henan Province, 453007,P.R.ChinaE-mail:Tel: +86-XXX-XXXXXXXFax: +86-XXX-XXXXXXXThank you very much for consideration!Sincerely Yours,Dr. XXX2). Dear Dr. Defendi ML:I am sending a manuscript entitled “ ” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - .Yours sincerely3). Dear Dr. A:Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are sub mitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers.4). Dear Dr. A:Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “” by sb. All authors have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers.二、询问有无收到稿件Dear Editors,We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we willsend our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.三、询问论文审查回音Dear Editors,It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.四、关于论文的总体审查意见1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest. A few m inor revision are list below.2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below.3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as –4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of – because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - .6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory.7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined.9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in T able 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays.10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used?五、给编辑的回信1. I n reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that –One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.2. I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include atoxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission.3. Thank you for your letter of –and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscripte ntitled “”. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval.4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed.5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red.6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in T able 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.11. I feel that th e rev iewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available.13. We prefer to retain the use of T able 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.15. The running title has been changed to “”.16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2).19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the rev ised manuscript is now suitable for publication.24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how toimprove our paper.25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees。