如何回复审稿人意见(Response to Reviews)
回复审稿人意见模板

Dear Editor and Reviewers:On behalf of my co-authors, we are very grateful to you for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript. we appreciate you very much for your positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Thermal Process and Mechanism of Phase Transition and Detoxification of Glass-ceramics from Asbestos Tailings” (ID: NOC-D-18-01200).We have studied reviewers’ comments carefully and tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. The following are the responses and revisions I have made in response to the reviewers' questions and suggestions on an item-by-item basis. Thanks again to the hard work of the editor and reviewer!Response to the comments of Reviewer #1Comment No. 1: Page number should be included in the manuscript.Response:Thanks to Reviewer for reminder, we added the page number to the manuscript.Comment No. 2: Is it differential thermal analysis or differential scanning calorimetry? (Abstract)Response: The crystallization and phase change of the samples were investigated by thermogravimetry-differential scanning calorimetry (TG-DSC), and the results were shown in figure 2.Comment No. 3: Please clarify: "Asbestos tailings are tailings produced during the mining and beneficiation of chrysotile (fibrid asbestos)" Given the fact that chrysotile is carcinogenic please include in the Introduction part some aspects about health regulations/concerns to take care during synthesis of chrysotile containing materials. For instance, which is the safety/allowed threshold for chrysotile content in building materials? (Introduction)Response: It is really true as Reviewer mentioned that due to the hazards of chrysotile, the use of chrysotile containing materials have been banned completely in many countries, and for the recycling of chrysotile containing materials, there are some legal restrictions which I have added to the section of Introduction. There are some safety hazards in the synthesis and use of asbestos-containing materials inevitably, however this concern doesn't exist in our experiment, because the samples prepared in the experiment are completely free of asbestos, which is explained in the response to Reviewer#2 below.Comment No. 4: Magnification within 1000-500 range included in the experimental part, but x5000 magnification is met in Figs 6. (Experimental characterization) Response: We are very sorry for our negligence of mistakenly writing the magnification range as 500-1000 in the experimental characterization, actually the magnification range is 500-5000.Response to the comments of Reviewer #2Comment No. 1: Manuscript deals with transformation of unhealthy chrysotile (serpentine) into forsterite and /or enstatite-containing materials for decorative building purposes. However, chrysotile content of the obtained materials should be thoroughly controlled.Response: Thank you for your valuable comment, it is definitely a critical issue that chrysotile content of the obtained materials (glass-ceramics) should be thoroughly controlled. Actually, the chrysotile in serpentine starts at 600℃ and completely removes hydroxyl at 700℃ resulting the decomposition of original minerals and the disintegration of structure, and form harmless substances including amorphous silica and forsterite. So in the experiment, the fiber structure chrysotile can be completely destroyed after pre-firing at 700℃. Furthermore, in the thermal treatment of crystallization and sintering at higher temperatures, the residue that has not been completely decomposed can be further decomposed and totally converted into harmless phases including forsterite, enstatite, etc. by solid phase reaction and solid-liquid reaction. Ultimately, the product was entirely asbestos-free and which can be seen from the morphology of the samples in figure 6.Response to the comments of Reviewer #3Comment No. 1: Give some reference for the chemical content of Asbestos tailings for the benefit of the reader. (Introduction)Response: As Reviewer suggested that it is indeed better to give some reference for the chemical content of Asbestos tailings. Two reference (reference 2 and reference 3) were added to confirm the chemical content and phase composition of asbestos tailings. Comment No. 2: How do you distinguish between the main crystal phase and the subcrystalline phase?Response: we are sorry that we may have not expressed it clearly, the word “subcrystalline” used in my manuscript may be not accurate. I think it would be suitable to change it to the word “minor”. The content of different crystal phases in the sample were determined by rietveld refinement using GSAS, and the results are shown below (with the weight fraction of forsterite being 39.44%, enstatite 24.92%, diopside 21.18% and magnesioferrite14.45% respectively). According to the result, it can be seen that the main crystal phases are forsterite and enstatite, and the minor phases are diopside and magnesioferrite.Fig 1. Rietveld refinement of the sample crystallized at 850℃ and sintered at 1200℃Comment No. 3: English has to be immproved.Response : Considering the Reviewer’s suggestion, we will take great effort to modify the sentence to make it more professional. The portion of language modification are marked in green in the revised manuscript, and I hope it can meet with requirement. 10203040506070802 ( )R e l a t i v e i n t e n s i t y (a .u .) × ① ② ③ ④ CalcObsDiff ① ② ③ ④Forsterite 39.44%Enstatite 24.92% Diopside 21.18%Magnesioferrite 14.45%。
审稿意见修改回复

审稿意见修改回复
一、表示感谢
哎呀,审稿老师呀,看到您的审稿意见啦,真的特别感谢您这么认真地看我的稿子呢。
您给的这些意见对我来说就像是宝藏一样,能让我的文章变得更好。
二、针对意见的回应
1. 关于内容部分的意见
您说有部分内容表述不够清晰,我也发现这个问题啦。
就像我在解释那个概念的时候,可能用了一些比较复杂的句子,我现在已经重新写了,用特别直白的话来说,就像和朋友聊天一样解释这个概念,让读者一看就懂。
您提到有些例子有点老套,我也觉得是呢。
所以我就到处找新的例子,找的时候可费劲啦,不过最后还是找到了一些特别有趣又新鲜的例子,把之前的老例子都替换掉啦。
2. 关于格式方面的意见
您说我的段落排版有点乱,我自己看了看,确实是这样。
我就重新调整了一下段落,让每个段落的主题都更明确,就像给每个段落都穿上了整齐的衣服一样。
对于引用部分的格式,我之前可能没太注意,现在按照要求都规范好啦,还仔细核对了引用的文献,确保没有错误。
三、整体的改进方向
我知道我的文章还有很多需要改进的地方呢。
我会继续努力的,在以后写文章的时候也会更加注意这些问题。
我会让文章的逻辑更加清晰,内容更加丰富有趣,就像把文章打造成一个充满惊喜的小世界一样。
而且我也会多参考一些优秀的文章,学习人家的写作方法,争取让自己的写作水平蹭蹭往上涨。
再次感谢审稿老师您的宝贵意见哦。
(完整版)如何回复审稿人意见(ResponsetoReviews)

Dear Editor,We have studied the valuable comments from you, the assistant editor and reviewers carefully, and tried our best to revise the manuscript. The point to point responds to the reviewer’s comments are listed as following:Responds to the rev iewer’s comments:Reviewer 1Comment 1: in page 3, line 40, we fed rats..." changed to rats were fed with... Response: According to the reviewer’s comment, we have corrected the sentence. Furthermore, we have had the manuscript polished with a professional assistance in writing.Comment 2:page 25. The style of reference 40 is not right (using initials for the first names). Since this paper has been published, the volume and page Nos should be provided.Response: Thank you for your careful work. We have added the volume and page numbers for reference 40.Reviewer 2Comment: I would like to thank the authors for their efforts in addressing the criticisms with additional experiments. The one criticism that they did not address was relating to energy expenditure as the reason that the animals on the low calcium diet gained more weight. While I understand that performing this experiment will not affect the conclusion of this manuscript, I do believe that this point could be discussed in the Discussion section.Response: Thank you for your valuable advice. Based on the previous revision, we further address the relationship between low calcium diet and energy expenditure in the section of discussion according to your thoughtful comments.Reviewer 3Comment 1: In the text you often write: “As previously described”. Unless that paper is from your lab or one of the method paper co-authors is on the present MS this is not quite proper since the statement infers method development from your lab. There are numerous instances like that in the methods section; these should all be changed “according to those described by…..”Response: We are sorry for this language mistake. We have carefully corrected this phrase throughout the manuscript according to your comment.Comment 2: There are still some wording, sentence structure and grammatical issues even in this basically well put together MS. For example, while authors may have been excited about the data you cannot start a sentence with “Excitedly” in line 418 or “Whatever” in line 395.Response: Thank you very much to point out the sentence structure and grammatical issues in our manuscript. According to the comments from you and the editors, we polished the manuscript with a professional assistance in writing, conscientiously.Comment 3:In my view a big omission in this work is ignoring the anabolic side of lipid metabolism as well as thermogenesis issues. For example all animals consumed the same amount of feed but we had extra fat storage in the low Ca diet groups. So where did the extra energy go? Zemel et al (citation 34) in similar work indicate that increased thermogenesis on the high Ca diet explains the dissipation of dietary energy. Further even though Zemel et al (#34) indicated lipogenesis was enhanced in the low Ca diets that was in 2000 and you should have monitored expression of FAS and UCP either as mRNA abundance or actual FAS/UCP changes via proteomics or blotting techniques. In any case these controls are missing here and not emphasized in the MS. Casual reading of this paper would lead to the conclusion that the dietary Ca effect on fat deposition is strictly a function of increased or decreased lipolysis. While lipolysis appears to be a major player, lipogenesis and thermogenesis cannot be ignored for completeness. In Fig 8 you also show a decline in cAMP for the low Ca diet. Well beta agonists or cAMP enhancers regulate transcription of adipose and liver FAS (in rats (J Biol Chem 271:2307, 1996) and recently with large animal models (Hausman et al J Animal Science 87:1218, 2009 and Halsey et al J Animal Science 89: 1011, 2011). In additioncAMP levels could have been monitored. I really do not like the last sentence in the Abstract line 47-50 where you state that “low calcium diet-induced increase in fat mass was due to enhanced lipogenesis mediated by an upregulated CaSR signaling pathway” Your results here show no such thing, this is a completely false statement based on data herein. Correct. You show that high Ca diets enhance lipolysis and low Ca diets are antilipolytic. You did not monitor lipid anabolism here at all. See also line 255-257 and lines 333-335 of your MS. Response: Thank you for your valuable and thoughtful comments. As you suggested that the anabolic side of lipid metabolism as well as thermogenesis issues should be monitored. We really agree with your viewpoints. In the present study, we did find that low calcium diet increased the mRNA level of fatty acid synthase (FAS) in white adipose tissue. Furthermore, the FAS mRNA level were also increased in adipocytes after treatment with 1,25-(OH)2D3in in-vitro experiments. However, the increased FAS mRNA levels were not affected by preventing either the nuclear vitamin D receptor (nVDR) or calcium-sensing receptor (CaSR), suggesting that FAS might not be involved in the CaSR pathway. In addition, we thought that FAS played its role in fatty acid synthesis mainly in liver previously. Besides, the manuscript was required to restrict number of total words and our previous focus was on the antilolytic role of CaSR in the process of fat accumulation. So we ignored to provide the data of FAS mRNA levels in the submitted manuscript. In the newly submitted manuscript, we have provided the mRNA levels according to your helpful suggestion.We have reported the effects of dietary calcium on UCP2 mRNA levels in adipose tissue and UCP3 in skeletal muscle in our previous studies (1, 2). Thus, we believed that low calcium diet led to decreased thermogenesis in the present study. It was a pity that we did not measure the rat core temperature in those studies. The UCP2 mRNA levels in adipocytes were observed to be decreased after treatment of 1,25-(OH)2D3. This effect was prevented by using nVDR CaSR gene silencing but not by CaSR gene knockdown, suggesting that UCP2 was not involved in CaSR pathways. In the newly submitted manuscript, we have provided the UCP2 results.Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. We are very sorry for our fault statement in the abstract. We have corrected it in the new manuscript.Comment 4: A point that does not emerge well from the discussion is how low Ca intakes result in higher intracellular [Ca] concentrations and really the effects on fatdeposition in the cells in many ways are due to an increased intracellular Ca level mediated via CaSR expression increases and the effect of VitD3 on nVDR show in Fig 8. The authors must remind readers that Ca levels in the blood are under hormonal regulation (Calcitonin, PTH and VitD3). Thus when diets low in Ca are consumed and blood Ca decline, PTH and VitD3 are called upon to mobilize bone Ca to replenish the blood Ca. Then coupled with an increase in CaSR more Ca actually is found in AT despite the fact that many would think the AT Ca level should decline. The reason is that tissue/circulating Ca levels are not diet depended but regulated. The vast bone stores of Ca will provide ample Ca here especially during a study of this length. While authors address these issues maybe could be presented in a less complicated discussion.Response:Thank you for your instructive suggestions. We are sorry for not describing the effect of low calcium diet on intracellular calcium concentrations mediated by CaSR, as well as the impact of hormone regulation on serum calcium levels clearly. According to your helpful advice, we have rewritten these two parts in the section of discussion. Thank you again.Comment 5: Not all citations are in JN styleResponse: We have careful recheck and corrected the style of the citations according to the requirement of JN.Comment 6: Abstract conclusion differs from lines 255-257 and 333-335; WHY? Response: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. The conclusion from lines 255-257 is about the effect of low calcium diet on serum levels of free fatty acids (FFAs) and lipids. We considered FFA and glycerol as indicators of TG hydrolysis in adipose tissue. The low calcium diet caused decreased serum FFA and glycerol levels without influencing lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity, so we thought the lipolytic effect of adipose tissue to be suppressed by low calcium diet. The conclusion from lines 333-335 was about the effect of 1,25-(OH)2D3 whose levels were increased under low calcium conditions on lipolysis. We used the glycerol level as the indicator of TG hydrolysis in adipocytes. Both the in vivo and in vitro experiments showed low calcium status caused an antilipolytic effect.Comment 7: Line 150-153. The qRT-PCR methodology is not at all understandable as you cite a Texas A&M published paper. This is completely insufficient with the newly established standards on gene expression via qRT-PCR. There is no mention of efficiencies of amplifications in these data nor how the use of the reference gene was established etc. I think Pfaffl and Bustin have recently written an article on this; please totally revise 150-153 in line with what you did and applying the new standards.Response: Thank you very much. Because the JN restricts the number of total words of manuscript, we cited the Texas A&M published paper. In the newly submitted manuscript, we describe the detailed protocols in our lab.Comment 8:Line 179 on Not clear as in sentences talk about different AT cell sources etc..revise.Response: We are sorry for not addressing the adipose tissue cell sources clearly. We have rewritten the methods.Comment 9: Any previous documentable work with siRNA?Response: Yes, we have documentable work with siRNA in our research team. The results were published in the journal of Biochem Biophys Res Commun (3).Comment 10: Line 214.. Cultured primary rat adipocytes and SW872 adipocytes ……Response: Thank you very much. According to your comment, we have had the manuscript polished and corrected the mistakes.。
如何有效回应审稿人的意见

如何有效回应审稿人的意见在学术研究和出版领域,面对审稿人的意见并给出有效的回应是至关重要的一环。
这不仅关系到论文能否顺利发表,更体现了作者对待学术的严谨态度和专业素养。
那么,如何才能有效地回应审稿人的意见呢?首先,要以正确的心态对待审稿人的意见。
审稿人的目的不是刻意刁难作者,而是帮助提高论文的质量和学术价值。
因此,作者应怀着感激和尊重的心态来审视这些意见,将其视为改进论文的宝贵机会。
在收到审稿人的意见后,第一步是仔细阅读和理解每一条意见。
有些意见可能比较直接和明确,比如要求补充实验数据、修改论证逻辑或修正语法错误。
而有些意见可能较为含蓄或宏观,需要作者仔细琢磨其背后的意图。
对于不明确的意见,不要急于猜测,而是可以通过邮件等方式与编辑沟通,确保自己准确把握审稿人的关注点。
接下来,对审稿人的意见进行分类整理。
可以将其分为必须修改的关键问题、建议性的改进意见以及可选择性考虑的问题。
对于关键问题,要给予最高的重视,投入足够的时间和精力去解决。
对于建议性的意见,要认真思考其合理性,并根据自己的研究和论文整体框架,决定是否采纳。
对于可选择性的问题,可以根据实际情况权衡其对论文质量的影响。
在回应审稿人的意见时,要做到条理清晰、逻辑严密。
可以采用逐条回应的方式,确保每一条意见都得到了回应。
在每条回应的开头,明确指出是针对哪一条意见进行的回复,例如“针对审稿人提出的第一条意见……”。
在回复中,要清晰地说明自己采取的措施或解释自己的观点。
如果进行了修改,要具体说明修改的内容和位置;如果不同意审稿人的意见,要礼貌且有理有据地阐述自己的理由,但同时也要表现出愿意进一步探讨和接受合理建议的态度。
回应的内容要具体而有针对性。
避免使用模糊、笼统的语言,比如“已进行修改”,而要详细说明如何修改,例如“增加了新的案例分析,以进一步支持文中的观点,相关内容在第 X 页第 X 段”。
如果需要补充数据或引用新的文献,要准确说明来源和作用。
怎么回复审稿人的意见

怎么回复审稿人的意见
1.审稿人的意见很重要
当你提交论文或研究报告时,审稿人的意见往往会对最终结果产生重要影响。
因此,我们需要认真看待审稿人提出的每一条意见,并予以恰当回复。
2.读懂审稿人的意见
在回复审稿人的意见之前,我们需要充分读懂他们所提出的问题或建议。
审稿人需要我们解释某些部分,或是针对某些错误或疏漏提出修改意见。
3.一一回复审稿人意见
根据审稿人的意见清单,我们需要一条一条进行回复。
我们需要说明具体哪些地方我们同意了审稿人的意见,哪些地方我们需要进行一些争议,还有哪些地方因为某些原因我们并不能完全按照审稿人的要求进行修改。
4.充分解释修改内容
在回复审稿人的意见中,我们需要提供充分的解释,说明我们在修改过程中的思考和具体方法。
通过说明我们的想法,我们可以让审稿人更好地理解我们的修改效果,并提出更有建设性的意见。
5.感激审稿人的意见
在回复审稿人的意见中,我们需要充分表达感激之情,说明我们会认真对待审稿人的建议,并做出改进。
这不仅表明我们对审稿人的意见的重视,也有助于建立更良好的合作关系。
6.重视管窥之见
在回复审稿人的意见时,我们需要记住审稿人往往具有丰富的学术经验和知识背景,所以他们的建议通常是有价值的。
我们应该重视和尊重审稿人的意见,认真思考并应用他们的建议。
综上所述,回复审稿人的意见是一项极其重要的工作。
如果我们能够正确地对待审稿人的意见,积极回应并充分解释,那么我们的研究可能会得到更高的认可,并提高我们的学术成就。
如何回复审稿人意见

如何回复审稿人意见很多人都遇到过回复审稿人意见的时候。
本人曾经因为回复审稿意见不合适而导致拒稿,相当的惨哪!!后来发现回复审稿意见时,除了写清修改内容外,还有一些话是必须要写的。
对审稿人的意见提出不同的看法也应该讲究一定的技巧。
由于这些话的英文都不难写,所以我直接写成中文表述,觉得有用的虫友自己翻译吧。
首先不论审稿人提了什么意见,你在回复的时候,第一句话一定要说:谢谢您的建议,您的所有建议都非常的重要,它们对我的论文写作和科研工作都具有重要的指导意义!!其次,在回复信的结尾最好写上再次谢谢您的建议,希望能够从您哪里学到更多的知识。
这句话最好用黑体,要显眼。
再次,如果审稿人提的意见你暂时无法做到(比如,要你增加实验或改进实验等)。
那么,为了论文尽快发表,你必须拒绝这样的要求。
但是,你不要摆出一大堆理由来证明这个意见是不好实现的。
你应该说:谢谢您的建议,它非常的重要,由于您的建议,我发现了我目前工作中的不足之处,我会在以后的工作中按照您的建议提高科研水平,取得更多成绩!这样就委婉的拒绝了评审意见,又让评审人觉得你很看重他的意见。
如果审稿人的意见明显有问题。
那么没办法了,你必须据理力争。
但是,你一定不能说:审稿人先生,我认为你的意见是错的!你不必对他的意见发表任何的评论,只需要列出你的理由和证据就可以了,结尾也不要强调你的观点是正确的。
简单说就是既不说你对,也不说我对,证据说话。
第五,如果审稿人的评价比较傲慢,而且有失公平。
那么,不用客气,直接写信给编辑,痛批审稿人。
(我就遇到过这样的情况,痛批后反而被录用。
)一篇稿子从酝酿到成型历经艰辛,投出去之后又是漫长的等待,好容易收到编辑的回信,得到的往往又是审稿人不留情面的一顿狂批。
这时候,如何有策略有技巧的回复审稿人就显得尤为重要。
好的回复是文章被接收的重要砝码,而不恰当的回复轻则导致再次修改从而拖延发稿时间,重则导致文章被拒,前功尽弃。
下面把我平时总结的一些答复审稿人的策略和写回复信的格式和技巧跟大家交流一下。
如何正确回复审稿人:标准的Response to reviewer
如何正确回复审稿人:标准的Response to reviewer在审稿意见回来之后,如何写一份标准的Response to reviewer!这篇Response to reviewer是投稿到International Journal of Pharmaceutics杂志,给审稿人写的回复意见,内容仅供参考!第1部分:对审稿人进行称呼;第2部分:总述对文稿的修改情况(一般如果文稿进行润色了,最好在这里提及一下),以及夸夸审稿人(夸夸他的意见或者建议很好,对稿件的提升很大,千万不要和审稿人顶,不是干这个事情的时候),对稿件的期待;第3部分:(标明)1#审稿人;第4部分:1#审稿人的第一个问题(将审稿人的问题复制进来即可,排版好);第5部分:1#审稿人的第一个问题的回复意见(谨慎认真,不可敷衍了事);第6部分:2#或者其他审稿人第7部分:感谢语(可自由发挥)第8部分:通讯作者名称,日期,机构等信息。
011)正确的心态成就正确的回复在回复审稿人意见之前,先庆祝一下你的研究论文已经走到同行评审这一步了吧~还要对百忙之中抽出时间来审阅你论文的审稿人们怀一颗感恩的心!2)在回复审稿人之前,先修改稿件当你准备好以专业、客观的方式处理审稿人的意见时,先和你的共同作者们讨论一下评审意见的内容,共同商量决定要接受哪些修改,反对哪些修改。
修改完论文之后再开始给审稿人写回复。
3)回复细节首先,感谢审稿人花时间审阅你的稿件。
然后,表明你已经解决了他们提出的所有问题。
回应审稿人的意见并不意味着你全部按照审稿人建议的修改。
而是意味着:这些建议你认真考虑过后,有的做了修改,有的没有修改但是会解释原因。
列出所有审稿人的意见以及你对每条意见的回复。
使用不同的字体或文字颜色来突出你的回答,使文本易于查看。
4)不要直接回复yes 或no。
即使是被要求做一些小的修改,比如改正拼写错误的单词,你可以说“We 've corrected the typo.”。
审稿意见回稿用语
论文返修(response letter)一些很有用的套话1、According to the associate editor and reviewers’ comments, we have made extensive modifications to our manuscript and supplemented extra data to make our results convincing.2、In this revised version, changes to our manuscript were all highlighted within the document by using red colored text.3、Thank you for your nice comments on our article. According to your suggestions, we have supplemented several data here and corrected several mistakes in our previous draft. Based on your comments, we also attached a point-by-point letter to you and the other two reviewers. We have made extensive revisions to our previous draft. The detailed point-by-point responses are listed below.4、Thanks for your help. We feel really sorry for our carelessness.5、Thank you for your reminding. You and the other two reviewers’ comments are all of great importance to our article. All of these comments have contributed a lot to improve the quality of our article. After this revision, we have written apoint-by-point response letter to you as you can see above. Meanwhile, we also wrote a point-by-point response letter to the other two nice reviewers to acknowledge their helps and denote where we made revisions.6、We feel great thanks for your professional review work on our article. As you are concerned, there are several problems that need to be addressed. According to your nice suggestions, we have made extensive corrections to our previous draft. We have added necessary data to supplement our results and edited our article extensively. The detailed corrections are listed below.7、We feel sorry that we did not provide enough information about XXXX.8、it is really a giant mistake to the whole quality of our article. We feel sorry for our carelessness. We have corrected it and we also feel great thanks for your point out.9、thanks for your suggestions. We feel sorry for our poor writings, however, we do invite a friend of us who is a native English speaker from USA help polish our article. Due to our friend’s help, the article was edited extensively. And we hope the revised manuscript could be acceptable for you.(10、thanks for your careful checks. We are sorry for our carelessness. Based on your comments, we have made the corrections to make the unit harmonized within the whole manuscript.11、your suggestion really means a lot to us. Yes, it would be more understandable if we XXX.12、According to your suggestion, we have corrected the “XXX” into “XXX”.13、thanks for your correction. It was indeed a serious grammatical error. And we have corrected it according to your suggestion.14、thanks for your suggestions. We feel sorry for the improper wording. We have used “XXXX” as you suggested.15、According to the reviewer’s comments, we have revised the manuscript extensively. If there are any other modifications we could make, we would like very much to modify them and we really appreciate your help. “xxxx” is a journal of great popularity and prestige. We hope that our manuscript could be considered for publication in your journal. Thank you very much for your help.:。
SCI审稿意见回复模板
精品文档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 t o 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 v ery 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 su ggestionAs 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..。
回复审稿人的意见模板
回复审稿人的意见模板Dear Reviewer,Thank you for your valuable comments on our manuscript. We appreciate your time and effort in reviewing our work. In response to your suggestions, we have carefully revised the manuscript, addressing each of your concerns. Below, we provide a summary of the changes made in the revised version.1. Revision of Introduction:- We have expanded the introduction to provide a more comprehensive overview of the topic and its relevance.- A new sub-section has been added to present the research background and significance more clearly.2. Clarification of Methodology:- We have revised the methodology section to include a more detailed description of the experimental design, data collection, and analysis.- In response to your comment regarding the sample size and representativeness, we have conducted additional experiments and included the results in the revised version.3. Results and Discussion:- We have reorganized the results section to enhance clarity and readability.- A detailed discussion of our findings has been included to provide a deeper understanding of the results.4. Inclusion of Additional Literature:- We have added relevant references as per your suggestion to strengthen the academic foundation of our study.- The citation formatting has been carefully checked and corrected throughout the manuscript.5. Language and Grammar:- We have carefully proofread the manuscript to improve its language and grammar.- In particular, we have paid attention to sentence structure, spelling, and punctuation errors.We sincerely believe that these revisions have substantially improved the quality and clarity of the manuscript. We would like to thank you once again for your constructive feedback and for helping us enhance our research. We are confident that the revised version of our manuscript meets the high standards of this journal. Best regards,[Your Name]。
- 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)。
Dear Editor,We have studied the valuable comments from you, the assistant editor and reviewers carefully, and tried our best to revise the manuscript. The point to point responds to the reviewer’s comments are listed as following:Responds to the rev iewer’s comments:Reviewer 1Comment 1: in page 3, line 40, we fed rats..." changed to rats were fed with... Response: According to the reviewer’s comment, we have corrected the sentence. Furthermore, we have had the manuscript polished with a professional assistance in writing.Comment 2:page 25. The style of reference 40 is not right (using initials for the first names). Since this paper has been published, the volume and page Nos should be provided.Response: Thank you for your careful work. We have added the volume and page numbers for reference 40.Reviewer 2Comment: I would like to thank the authors for their efforts in addressing the criticisms with additional experiments. The one criticism that they did not address was relating to energy expenditure as the reason that the animals on the low calcium diet gained more weight. While I understand that performing this experiment will not affect the conclusion of this manuscript, I do believe that this point could be discussed in the Discussion section.Response: Thank you for your valuable advice. Based on the previous revision, we further address the relationship between low calcium diet and energy expenditure in the section of discussion according to your thoughtful comments.Reviewer 3Comment 1: In the text you often write: “As previously described”. Unless that paper is from your lab or one of the method paper co-authors is on the present MS this is not quite proper since the statement infers method development from your lab. There are numerous instances like that in the methods section; these should all be changed “according to those described by…..”Response: We are sorry for this language mistake. We have carefully corrected this phrase throughout the manuscript according to your comment.Comment 2: There are still some wording, sentence structure and grammatical issues even in this basically well put together MS. For example, while authors may have been excited about the data you cannot start a sentence with “Excitedly” in line 418 or “Whatever” in line 395.Response: Thank you very much to point out the sentence structure and grammatical issues in our manuscript. According to the comments from you and the editors, we polished the manuscript with a professional assistance in writing, conscientiously.Comment 3:In my view a big omission in this work is ignoring the anabolic side of lipid metabolism as well as thermogenesis issues. For example all animals consumed the same amount of feed but we had extra fat storage in the low Ca diet groups. So where did the extra energy go? Zemel et al (citation 34) in similar work indicate that increased thermogenesis on the high Ca diet explains the dissipation of dietary energy. Further even though Zemel et al (#34) indicated lipogenesis was enhanced in the low Ca diets that was in 2000 and you should have monitored expression of FAS and UCP either as mRNA abundance or actual FAS/UCP changes via proteomics or blotting techniques. In any case these controls are missing here and not emphasized in the MS. Casual reading of this paper would lead to the conclusion that the dietary Ca effect on fat deposition is strictly a function of increased or decreased lipolysis. While lipolysis appears to be a major player, lipogenesis and thermogenesis cannot be ignored for completeness. In Fig 8 you also show a decline in cAMP for the low Ca diet. Well beta agonists or cAMP enhancers regulate transcription of adipose and liver FAS (in rats (J Biol Chem 271:2307, 1996) and recently with large animal models (Hausman et al J Animal Science 87:1218, 2009 and Halsey et al J Animal Science 89: 1011, 2011). In additioncAMP levels could have been monitored. I really do not like the last sentence in the Abstract line 47-50 where you state that “low calcium diet-induced increase in fat mass was due to enhanced lipogenesis mediated by an upregulated CaSR signaling pathway” Your results here show no such thing, this is a completely false statement based on data herein. Correct. You show that high Ca diets enhance lipolysis and low Ca diets are antilipolytic. You did not monitor lipid anabolism here at all. See also line 255-257 and lines 333-335 of your MS. Response: Thank you for your valuable and thoughtful comments. As you suggested that the anabolic side of lipid metabolism as well as thermogenesis issues should be monitored. We really agree with your viewpoints. In the present study, we did find that low calcium diet increased the mRNA level of fatty acid synthase (FAS) in white adipose tissue. Furthermore, the FAS mRNA level were also increased in adipocytes after treatment with 1,25-(OH)2D3in in-vitro experiments. However, the increased FAS mRNA levels were not affected by preventing either the nuclear vitamin D receptor (nVDR) or calcium-sensing receptor (CaSR), suggesting that FAS might not be involved in the CaSR pathway. In addition, we thought that FAS played its role in fatty acid synthesis mainly in liver previously. Besides, the manuscript was required to restrict number of total words and our previous focus was on the antilolytic role of CaSR in the process of fat accumulation. So we ignored to provide the data of FAS mRNA levels in the submitted manuscript. In the newly submitted manuscript, we have provided the mRNA levels according to your helpful suggestion.We have reported the effects of dietary calcium on UCP2 mRNA levels in adipose tissue and UCP3 in skeletal muscle in our previous studies (1, 2). Thus, we believed that low calcium diet led to decreased thermogenesis in the present study. It was a pity that we did not measure the rat core temperature in those studies. The UCP2 mRNA levels in adipocytes were observed to be decreased after treatment of 1,25-(OH)2D3. This effect was prevented by using nVDR CaSR gene silencing but not by CaSR gene knockdown, suggesting that UCP2 was not involved in CaSR pathways. In the newly submitted manuscript, we have provided the UCP2 results.Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. We are very sorry for our fault statement in the abstract. We have corrected it in the new manuscript.Comment 4: A point that does not emerge well from the discussion is how low Ca intakes result in higher intracellular [Ca] concentrations and really the effects on fatdeposition in the cells in many ways are due to an increased intracellular Ca level mediated via CaSR expression increases and the effect of VitD3 on nVDR show in Fig 8. The authors must remind readers that Ca levels in the blood are under hormonal regulation (Calcitonin, PTH and VitD3). Thus when diets low in Ca are consumed and blood Ca decline, PTH and VitD3 are called upon to mobilize bone Ca to replenish the blood Ca. Then coupled with an increase in CaSR more Ca actually is found in AT despite the fact that many would think the AT Ca level should decline. The reason is that tissue/circulating Ca levels are not diet depended but regulated. The vast bone stores of Ca will provide ample Ca here especially during a study of this length. While authors address these issues maybe could be presented in a less complicated discussion.Response:Thank you for your instructive suggestions. We are sorry for not describing the effect of low calcium diet on intracellular calcium concentrations mediated by CaSR, as well as the impact of hormone regulation on serum calcium levels clearly. According to your helpful advice, we have rewritten these two parts in the section of discussion. Thank you again.Comment 5: Not all citations are in JN styleResponse: We have careful recheck and corrected the style of the citations according to the requirement of JN.Comment 6: Abstract conclusion differs from lines 255-257 and 333-335; WHY? Response: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. The conclusion from lines 255-257 is about the effect of low calcium diet on serum levels of free fatty acids (FFAs) and lipids. We considered FFA and glycerol as indicators of TG hydrolysis in adipose tissue. The low calcium diet caused decreased serum FFA and glycerol levels without influencing lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity, so we thought the lipolytic effect of adipose tissue to be suppressed by low calcium diet. The conclusion from lines 333-335 was about the effect of 1,25-(OH)2D3 whose levels were increased under low calcium conditions on lipolysis. We used the glycerol level as the indicator of TG hydrolysis in adipocytes. Both the in vivo and in vitro experiments showed low calcium status caused an antilipolytic effect.Comment 7: Line 150-153. The qRT-PCR methodology is not at all understandable as you cite a Texas A&M published paper. This is completely insufficient with the newly established standards on gene expression via qRT-PCR. There is no mention of efficiencies of amplifications in these data nor how the use of the reference gene was established etc. I think Pfaffl and Bustin have recently written an article on this; please totally revise 150-153 in line with what you did and applying the new standards.Response: Thank you very much. Because the JN restricts the number of total words of manuscript, we cited the Texas A&M published paper. In the newly submitted manuscript, we describe the detailed protocols in our lab.Comment 8:Line 179 on Not clear as in sentences talk about different AT cell sources etc..revise.Response: We are sorry for not addressing the adipose tissue cell sources clearly. We have rewritten the methods.Comment 9: Any previous documentable work with siRNA?Response: Yes, we have documentable work with siRNA in our research team. The results were published in the journal of Biochem Biophys Res Commun (3).Comment 10: Line 214.. Cultured primary rat adipocytes and SW872 adipocytes ……Response: Thank you very much. According to your comment, we have had the manuscript polished and corrected the mistakes.。