SCI投稿全过程，希望对大家有点用处
1. 稿件＋cover lettes
Dear Prof. Gil:
This is a manuscript by**and **entitled “.......”. It is submittedto be considered for publication as a “...” in your journal. Thispaper is new. Neither the entire paper nor any part of its contenthas been published or has been accepted elsewhere. It is not beingsubmitted to any other journal.
We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readersof your journal as it ........
Correspondence should be addressed to **at the following address,phone and fax number, and email address:
...
Thanks very much for your attention to our paper.
Sincerely yours,
**
2. 格式不对，英语不好，修改再投，呵呵。以下是主编来信（其实这样的信一般是编辑写的）
To: *@yahoo.com.cn,*@sina.com.cn
From: jam@oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Date: 04 Oct 2005
CC: Subject: Journal of Applied Microbiology - JAM-2005-1155
04 Oct 2005
Dear Dr. ＊
Manuscript: JAM-2005-1155
Title: *
Author(s): 1) *2)* 3) *
Thank you for submitting the above manuscript to the Journal ofApplied Microbiology. Your manuscript has not been reviewed as I amsorry to have to inform you that, as currently presented, it is notsuitable for publication in the journal. One of the main issuesrelates to the use of English, that the referees feel makessections of the text ambiguous. You are strongly advised to seekthe advice of a natural English speaker. In addition, themanuscript does not comply with the style of the journal and youshould access the current nstructions for Authors? within theublications? section of the SfAM web-site:
http://www.sfam.org.uk/.
In particular, the Results and Discussion sections must NOT becombined and you should not include a Conclusions section. Legendsto figs must be on a separate page and you should abbeviate journaltitles. If you feel able to modify your manuscript taking intoaccount the above comments then the Editors would be willing toreconsider a revised manuscript. The revised manuscript should beuploaded as prompted on the submission site at: http://appliedmicrobiology.manuscriptcentral.com
Yours sincerely
Arthur Gilmour,
Chief Editor, JAM
3.按照该刊物格式的要求（这一点非常重要，态度决定一切，呵呵），认真修改，但是英语还是那个英语，就那水平，没有法子改。发过去，稿件被审了。以下是主编和审稿人意见。
To: *@yahoo.com.cn, *@sina.com.cn
From: jam@oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Date: 02 Dec 2005
CC: Subject: Journal of Applied Microbiology - JAM-2005-1303
02 Dec 2005
Dear Dr. *
Manuscript: JAM-2005-1303
Title: *
Author(s): *
Thank you for submitting the above manuscript to Journal of AppliedMicrobiology. Your manuscript has been reviewed and I am sorry tohave to inform you that, as currently presented, it is not suitablefor publication in the journal. However, you are encouraged tomodify your manuscript taking into account the reviewers’comments,in which case the Editors would be willing to reconsider and I willbe pleased to receive a revised manuscript. The revised paper willbe reviewed once more and the decision of the Editors is final. Ifyou decide to submit a revised manuscript I should be grateful ifyou would include with your submission a detailed explanation ofhow you have dealt with the points raised by the referees. Thismust be entered into the fields entitled Response to Editor andResponse to Reviewers which appear during online submissionotherwise they will not be available to the handling editor andreviewers respectively.
In addition, to help in assessing the reviewing process, pleaseindicate any changes in the revised manuscript by using thehighlighter tool in Word to highlight the changes in yellow. Beforeresubmitting your manuscript please also ensure that any artworkmeets the criteria as outlined in the journal's instructions toauthors, given in the weblink below. Pleasenote that poor qualityfigures may delay the publication of your paper.
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/authors/digill.asp
The revised manuscript should be uploaded via your correspondingauthor centre, at: http://appliedmicrobiology.manuscriptcentral.comClick on the 'revised manuscript' option and the title of yourpaper to submit your revised manuscript. Comments on technicalaspects of your paper are included below:
Yours sincerely
Arthur Gilmour,
Chief Editor, JAM
EDITOR'S COMMENTS TO AUTHORS
Dear authors,
Upon careful consideration of the comments from both reviewers Ibelieve it is important to address the issues raised about thedescription of some of your methods and more importantly discussionand hence I recommend a major revision before publication. However,I hope you will find the suggestions relatively striaghtforward toimplement. Please make sure that you address all the points raisedby both reviewers.
COMMENTS FROM REFEREES: (Comments in attachment form should beaccessed from your corresponding author centre)
Reviewer 1 Comments:
1. General Comments：The Introduction clearly describes thebackground and significance of the work. The Materials and Methodssection is short on the details of the work. The Discussion doesnot adequately describe the work in relation to other research. Themanuscript is very readable.
2. Specific comments
a. Major
1) The experimental conditions described on lines 74-81 areincomplete. The concentration and source of tobacco waste used
in the experimental runs, results of which are shown in Table 2,are not reported. Also, the length of the experimental runs shouldbe reported in this section. The only reference to the run time isgiven on line 170. It is not sufficient to report only the percentnicotine degradation, but the overall rate and amount of nicotinedegraded should be determinable. Also, the amount and source ofmaterials should be reported.
2) The authors should discuss the use of optimum amounts andwhether these optimum amounts could be used on a large scale. Forexample, would the cost of Tween 80 and yeast extract be reasonableat approximately 1 g/L?
3) Comparisons should be made with previous work. In particular,rates of nicotine degradation should be compared with previouswork. A key reference for this is the Uchida et al. paper. Thejournal cited is Science Paper. Is this the correct citation? Icould not locate this paper.
4) On line 91 it is stated that runs were made in duplicate. Thedata presented in Table 2 and the analysis from Table 3 do not showduplicate runs.
b. Minor
1) The pure error term listed in Table 3 appears to be the totalcorrected error, corrected for the mean, and not the pureerror.
Reviewer 2 Comments:
1 General comments: The paper deals with an important appliedaspect of nicotine biodegradation by bacterium. Additionally, theuse of factorial analysis to predict the best
composition of medium to give the best nicotine degradation rate itis very relevant to this field. In conclusion, the paper is a goodpiece of work.
2) Specific comments for revision: The paper needs an editingrevision in order to improve the final version. Many words arestick; 祃 must be replaced by 礚; in my version 篊 appears as an opensquare; in pag. 7, l.136, Liu et al. 2003 is missing in thereference list.
4. 我们的答复
Response to Editor and Response to Reviewers
Dear editor,
I delayed the revised manuscript because my son was born lastmonth. Moreover, I supplemented one validation experiment using 30l Bioreactor. Hence, the results of validation experiment in theoriginal manuscript replaced by new results in the revisedmanuscript thus may be much useful. Besides, I revised the paperaccording to editor and reviewer comments. I addressed the issuesraised about the description of some my methods and compared ourresults with other studies. Quality of table and figures also wasimproved.
Best wishes to you!
Yours sincerely,
Doctor *
COMMENTS FROM REFEREES: (Comments in attachment form should be
accessed from your corresponding author centre)
Reviewer 1 Comments:
1. General Comments
The Introduction clearly describes the background and significanceof the work. The Materials and Methods section is short on thedetails of the work. The Discussion does not adequately describethe work in relation to other research. The manuscript is veryreadable.
2. Specific comments
a. Major
1) The experimental conditions described on lines 74-81 areincomplete. The concentration and source of tobacco waste used inthe experimental runs, results of which are shown in Table 2, arenot reported. Also, the length of the experimental runs should bereported in this section. The only reference to the run time isgiven on line 170. It is not sufficient to report only the percentnicotine degradation, but the overall rate and amount of nicotinedegraded should be determinable. Also, the amount and source ofmaterials should be reported.
Ø The experiment conditions were supplemented inrevised manuscript. Please see on line 80-91.
Ø The tobacco waste was collected from Bengbu CigaretteCo. Ltd., Anhui of P.R. China and the content of nicotine is about1.36 %. Please see on line 82-84.
Ø The content of nicotine was about 1.36 % in tobaccowaste and 1220 mg/L in tobacco extract.
Ø The specific biodegradation rates of nicotine werecompared with the other nicotine-degrading bactria in application.Please see on line 207-212 and table 4 on line 330.
Ø The time of experimental runs was 12 h in CCDexperiment. Please see on line 87.
Ø In optimal conditions, the percent nicotinedegradation, overall rate and amount of nicotine degraded weredetermined. Please see on line 181-183. The tobacco waste used inthe optimal experiment also was collected from Bengbu Cigarette Co.Ltd, Anhui of P.R. China. Please see on line 82-84.
2) The authors should discuss the use of optimum amounts andwhether these optimum amounts could be used on a large scale. Forexample, would the cost of Tween 80 and yeast extract be reasonableat approximately 1 g/L?
Ø The economics of biodegradation needs to be analyzedand the costs compared with those of other nicotine degradationmethods. In this study, source supplement could improved nicotinedegradation and reduced time of nicotine degradation. The resultsindicated that strain DN2 could be used on a large scale. On theother, source supplement will increase the operating costs.However, yeast extract, glucose and Tween 80 were commerciallyavailable and inexpensive. Please see on line 213-220.
3) Comparisons should be made with previous work. In particular,rates of nicotine degradation should be compared with previouswork. A key reference for this is the Uchida et al. paper. Thejournal cited is Science Paper. Is this the correct citation? Icould not locate this paper.
Ø In revised manuscript, we compared our results withprevious work. Please see online 208-213 in discussion section.
Ø Uchida et al. paper is Japanese. I don’t understandJapanese, so I did not understand accurately mean of the paper. Iasked a teacher from Japan, conclusion of the paper was “glucosecould improve * biodegradation in a glucose-* medium ” and themount of the increase was not reported in this paper. Please see online 197-199. I will submit the reference with the revisedmanuscript.
4) On line 91 it is stated that runs were made in duplicate. Thedata presented in Table 2 and the analysis from Table 3 do not showduplicate runs.
Ø The runs were made in duplicated. However all mostpaper that I seen in literature did not show repeat runs such astable 2. The errors <10%. The errors showed in table 3. Pleasesee table 3 on line 325.
b. Minor
1) The pure error term listed in Table 3 appears to be the totalcorrected error, corrected for the mean, and not the pureerror.
Ø It was revised in revised manuscript. Please seetable 3 on line 325.
Reviewer 2 Comments:
1 General comments: The paper deals with an important appliedaspect of nicotine biodegradation by bacterium. Additionally, theuse of factorial analysis to predict the best composition of mediumto give the best nicotine degradation rate it is very relevant tothis field. In conclusion, the paper is a good piece of work.
2) Specific comments for revision: The paper needs an editingrevision in order to improve the final version. Many words arestick; 祃 must be replaced by 礚; in my version 篊 appears as an opensquare; in pag. 7, l.136, Liu et al. 2003 is missing in thereference list.
Ø I read the journal’s instructions and recent papersand revised the paper according to the journal’s criteria. Allletters were re-typed, and quality of tables and figures wereimproved.
Ø In my email, “祃 must be replaced by 礚” could not bedisplayed correctly.
Ø An open square may occur in submitting manuscript. Wewill submit the revised in world version and PDF version forreview.
Ø The reference, Liu et al. 2003, was added in therevised manuscript. Please see on line 266.
5. 主编回复意见，generally acceptable
To: *@yahoo.com.cn,*@sina.com.cn
From: jam@oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Date: 17 Jan 2006
CC:
Subject: Journal of Applied Microbiology - JAM-2005-1303.R1
17 Jan 2006
Dear Dr. ＊
Manuscript: JAM-2005-1303.R1
Title: *
Author(s): *
Thank you for submitting the above manuscript to the Journal ofApplied Microbiology. Your manuscript has been reviewed and whilstit is generally acceptable, there are some points of a relativelyminor nature that need to be addressed before it can be consideredfor publication in the journal. If you decide to submit a revisedmanuscript, I should be grateful if you would include with yoursubmission a detailed explanation of how you have dealt with thepoints raised by the referees. This must be entered into the fieldsentitled Response to Editor and Response to Reviewers which appearduring online submission otherwise they will not be available tothe handling editor and reviewers respectively. In addition, tohelp in assessing the reviewing process, please indicate anychanges in the revised manuscript by using the highlighter tool inWord to highlight the changes in yellow. An exclusive licence formshould accompany the revised manuscript. This can be downloadedfrom the journal homepage or from the 'Instructions and Forms' linkon the submission site at: http://appliedmicrobiology.manuscriptcentral.comThe completed form can then be faxed to +44(0)1865 471 787.
Before resubmitting your manuscript please ensure that any artworkmeets the criteria as outlined by the journal's instructions toauthors. Please be aware that poor quality figures may delay thethe publication date of your paper. It is the policy of the Journalfor authors to pay the full cost for the reproduction of theircolour artwork. If there is colour artwork in your manuscript whenit is accepted for publication, Blackwell Publishing require you tocomplete and return a colour work agreement form before your papercan be published. This form can be downloaded as a PDF from the'Instructions and Forms' link on the submission site. If you areunable to download these forms please contact the EditorialOffice.
The revised manuscript should be uploaded via your correspondingauthor centre at: http://appliedmicrobiology.manuscriptcentral.comClick on the 'revised manuscript' option and the title of yourpaper to submit the revised manuscript.
Yours sincerely
Arthur Gilmour,
Chief Editor, JAM
EDITOR'S COMMENTS TO AUTHORS
Dear author,
First of all congratulation on the recent birth of your son. I havecarefully considered your response to the reviewers and the revisedmanuscript and I am happy to see that you have managed to implementthe suggested changes. I believe the manuscript can be publishedonce the minor corrections indicated in the attached file areimplemented thus I recommend an 'Accept subject to minor revision'decision on this revised manuscript. Thank you and I am lookingforward to hearing from you in the near future.
Kind regards
REFEREE COMMENTS TO AUTHORS (Comments in attachment form should beaccessed from your corresponding author centre) Reviewer 1Comments: The revised version addresses the comments raised by thereviewers on the original manuscript. However, there are a fewminor (mainly grammatical errors) corrections that need to beimplemented (highlighted in yellow or underlined and commentsinserted in the attached file).
6.小修改，就是语法错误，其实编辑都帮你改好了，只是要作者本人录入。
7. 接受出版
To: ＊@yahoo.com.cn,＊@sina.com.cn
From: jam@oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
Date: 22 Jan 2006
CC:
Subject: Journal of Applied Microbiology - JAM-2005-1303.R2
22 Jan 2006
Dear Dr. ＊
Manuscript: JAM-2005-1303.R2
Title: ＊
Author(s): *
Thank you for submitting the above manuscript. I am pleased toinform you that it has been accepted for publication. Before themanuscript can go into production, we will require asignedexclusive licence form, which can be downloaded from the journalhomepage or from the 'Instructions and Forms' link on thesubmission site at:*.The completed form should then be faxed to +44(0)1865 471 787 and a hard copy sent to the address given on theform.
Please note that it is the policy of the Journal for authors to paythe full cost for the reproduction of their colour artwork. Ifthere is colour artwork in your manuscript when it is accepted forpublication, Blackwell Publishing require you to complete andreturn a colour work agreement form before your paper can bepublished. This form can be downloaded as a PDF from or from the'Instructions and Forms' link on the submission site. If you areunable to download these forms please contact the Editorial Office.After the relevant forms have been received and the manuscriptedited, the corresponding author will receive an email alertcontaining a link to a web site. A working email address musttherefore be provided for the corresponding author. The proof canbe downloaded as a PDF from this site. Acrobat Reader will berequired in order to read this file. This software may bedownloaded (free of charge) from the following web site: *
This will enable the file to be opened, read on screen and printedout in order for any corrections to be added. Corrections should bereturned to the Production Editor via email, fax or post, asdetailed on the proofing instructions sent to you along with thenotification that your e-proof was now available. Please note thatexcessive changes made by the author in the proofs, excludingtypesetter errors, will be charged separately. Hard or electroniccopy of your paper will be destroyed two months after publicationunless you specifically request that it be retained.
Thank you for choosing the Journal of Applied Microbiology topublish your work and hope that you will consider the journal forfuture publications.
Yours sincerely
Arthur Gilmour,
Chief Editor, JAM
8．Proofs一直没有来，写了封信询问，看看人家的态度，只有敬佩。想想中国的小编们，只有叹息（当然也有很不错的，比如微生物学报、生物工程学报）：以下是问与答：
Dear Dr *
At 11:50 +0000 14/3/06, Yongjun Yuan wrote:
>> Can you tell me when the paper will be publised?（问的好直接，其实前面问过编辑了，熟悉了）
Thank you for your enquiry. Your article has been received intoproduction. Unfortunately, we are currently working with a backlogof articles for this journal. We are processing the articles asfast as we can in order of acceptance, but we are seeing somedelays to our normal production schedule. I apologise for anyinconvenience. Proofs of your article are likely to be available inapproximately three weeks' time. Again, I do apologise for thedelay.
Best wishes
Rhiannon Miller
9.在Rhiannon承诺的第三个星期的最后一天，Poofs来了。
本文转自诺贝尔学术资源网 http://www.i-nobel.com/bbs,☆文献互助、学术交流和学术资源
文章链接 http://www.i-nobel.com/bbs/read.php?tid=56541&fpage=0&toread=&page=1