看你论文多长,逻辑论述是不是太复杂。一般一个礼拜差不多。如果没有其它事,5000字文章,三天能翻译成功。
不一定。SCI审稿人都是论文主题涉及领域内的专家,老师或者相关政府部门的领导等,比如大学的教授,或者在生产公司的科研工作者,比如华为的博士或者博士后。
你是什么方向?几个吧:International Geology Review,算是二区吧,稿源较少,审稿快,有一段时间甚至主编审一下就过了;JAES(亚洲地质),主编是中国人,审稿较快,基本上数据过硬的都能接收,影响因子也不错;Lithos,岩石和固体地球科学可以考虑,审稿很快,二区,老牌杂志但是被中国人灌水灌得不行了。有一个主编是华人,但是不太,比外国人似乎还严格一些。Journal of Geodynamics, 二区的,大构造和地球物理的可以考虑,速度一般,稿源少,比较容易;GR(冈瓦纳研究),很多地方弄成一区了,大杂烩什么都有,审稿快,但是现在对稿子要求也不算低了,想搞个便宜一区可以试试;
t take me long to see how this
这是因为Nature上面要求的专业性比较高,而且一旦在上面发表过文章之后,就说明自己非常的有成就,同时这个专栏主要针对的就是一些西方的国家。
因为Nature是非常顶尖的科研期刊,只有学术成就非常高的人才有机会在上面发表自己的文章。
《Nature》杂志蛮不错的
�皇嵌晕颐钦庑┬〉ノ坏娜司涂嗔耍�蛭�悴蝗鲜端�牵�膊豢赡苁撬�堑难��D阒挥小⒅荒芡ü�岣咦约何恼轮柿坎鸥�谢�帷;褂芯褪锹���省⑿��,但目前因为杂志生存的原因,较之以前速度可能也都快起来了,也甚至还有些只要给钱就收的杂志,类似于西太平洋大学似的,这是卖文凭,人家就是卖文章的,当然我想大部分杂志还是能够“客观、公正”进行稿源选择吧,但愿吧。 那SCI杂志又是如何审稿呢,相反应该更“客观”,至少不会歧视你是来自无名的单位,就受邀于几个杂志作为其审稿人来说,绝大部分都采用同行审稿(peer-review),也即邀请你审稿的文章多半是与被邀请人所作的研究相似,这就不存在一定是所谓的“牛人”来审了。与你的职称完全没有关系,不是说教授就有资格,而初级就没有资格被SCI杂志邀请审稿杂志社一般都会通过你发表文章找到你的email(我想应该是这样的,所以通讯更牛叉啊,否在人家不会邀请到你的) 当然你也可以拒绝,因为毕竟不是所有的文章我们都有能力去审的,至少我还没那水平,也曾拒绝过一篇关于基因分析的(虽然了解一些,但很难把握)如你接受后,则会自动连接到审稿人页面(如下),除了author centre外,同时也有reviewer centre的页而一般如果没有被邀请审稿,通常进入作者系统后,只会有anthor centre接下来就是审稿了,这篇文章是国内某F教授为通讯的一篇关于血管紧张素在皮肤中作用的综述,毕竟人家在国内还是相当的啊,也是顺便学习了一下,可一下载稿件一看,怎么看怎么不像综述,充其量是个mini review,四个段落,1198个字,26篇参考文献。既然杂志社邀请我审稿,也综述的我所做过的研究,却没引用我的文章,有点“失落”,更重要的是更多文献他们也没有引用,而是引用他们自己的“中文”文章,但还是认真的“分析”了此文。给出审稿意见如下:The review by *** et addresses the interesting and novel topic of the renin-angiotensin-system (RAS), which was originally described as a cardiovascular endocrine system, in skin physiology and Only in recent years, the cutaneous RAS has become an area of scientific interest, and the number of related publications is increasing from year to Therefore, it is indeed time for an article which reviews the existing literature up to However, this review has a number of 中国人语言每次都被审稿人发飙,我的也是,至少部分文章投出去审稿人也是要让我改进,唔,每次让我找个母语的人帮修改,我滴个汗,俺们中国人哪有以说英语母语的,索性每次都“忽悠”过去了,当然也许只是些小杂志的原因吧,语言真的需要提高、再提高。同样该综述,我也提出了我的部分语言意见 - Language editing is - The number of publications dealing with the RAS in skin is still not very Therefore, there is no need to focus this review article on the AT2-receptor (for which data are even more limited) Instead, this review should consider all published data about the cutaneous RAS - Many publications are For example: �6�1Min et , Endocrinology 2004 �6�1Nakai et , J Dermatol Sci 2008 �6�1Rompe et , Hypertension 2010 �6�1Steckelings et , (Exp Dermatol 2004) �6�1Yevdokimova et , J Dermatol Sci 2007 �6�1Morihara et , J Am Acad Dermatol 2006 �6�1Yahata et , J Biol Chem 2006 �6�1Takeda et , Am J Pathol 2004 并逐部分给予我的意见:Abstract:- In the case of AT1R-blockade, AT2R unmasking may indeed be important, but blockade of the AT1R thus interrupting AT1R-mediated actions of Ang II, is at least as The respective passage in the abstract is Introduction: - 3, line 13: “disorders of RAS”: A “disorder” of the RAS has so far only been described for scleroderma (not saying whether the deregulated RAS is a primary cause or only a secondary phenomenon) It is indeed likely that the RAS is deregulated in the other mentioned dermatoses as well, but this is pure speculation and should be discussed as - 3, line 19: “existence of RAS in skin”: References 2 and 3 demonstrate only the existence of receptors, but not of the whole RAS in Adequate references would be: Steckelings et , Exp Dermatol or Philips MI et , In: Saavedra J M, Timmermans P M W M, Angiotensin New York: Plenum Press, 1994: 377– - 3, line 20: “It has been documented…”: It is correct that AT2R upregulation has been demonstrated in skin, and it is also correct that Ang II has been shown to accelerate cutaneous wound However, it has never been shown that acceleration of wound healing by Ang II is mediated by the AT2R In fact, this is rather unlikely, since the AT2R acts anti- - Chapter II 1: Physiological receptor expression should be addressed prior to receptor expression in - p4, line 5 from bottom: “Ang II either…” Please add - chapter II 2: The high expression of Ang II receptors during foetal life indeed suggests a role in However, Ang II receptor knockout mice show no severe developmental deficits, in particular not in Furthermore, there are almost no data about what specifically the role of the AT2R in development may This should be - chapter II 3: This chapter is much too For example, the description of deregulated receptor expression in some dermatoses by Takeda and Kondo (Am J Pathol 2001, Br J Dermatol 2001 and 2002) has not been This chapter may further be the place for some speculations (based on data from non-cutaneous tissues) in which dermatoses the RAS may be - page 5, line 5: “Kawaguchi et al …in SSc fibroblasts, suggesting that… “: This is not a logical What is the causal link between AT2R in SSc fibroblasts and excessive ECM production? Furthermore, expression of AT2R has been shown by several authors for normal - page 5, line 12: Steckelings is a woman (“her” colleagues) - page 5, last section: The impact of AT2R expression on immune cells and of AT2R effects on vascularisation and neuroregeneration with regard to wound healing is not sufficiently - 6, 2 lines from bottom: “…restoring normality not only in the CV system but also in many tissues, such as ” Please provide a reference for the statement that the AT2R has been shown to restore normality in 最后提交时杂志社会有一个勾选表,该文被我拒了该文编辑在结合另一个审稿人意见的情况下还是reject此文了,从投稿到最后给出decision约6个星期,应该说是正常速度了。有意思的是中途,编辑发信催审稿了,估计是作者急着想知道结果,可以理解,想想之前的我们也何尝不是啊,每天都不停得刷屏,也写过催稿信,还以为没有用,甚至有时候也不“敢”写,因为害怕是否会有“反”作用,看来某些时候写信催催也还是可以的。总之,审稿也未必是件好差事,不过倒是可以知己知彼,可以站在审稿人的角度去思考我们自己在写文章的时候应该注意什么,别人文章的有哪些优点、缺点,我们都可以好好去总结,同时我们也获得与最新研究领域的接触也为以后研究,能够写作提供更多的思路。
正常的,不一定都是英文的
阅读SCI论文即:阅读哪些文章(对象),阅读文章的目的是什么(目标),怎么阅读(方法)阅读什么文章。阅读文章,需要阅读经典的专业基础文章、survey(概述)文章,及5-10篇左右阅读新的高质量的专业文章。好的文章怎么找?首先找专业领域中好的会议、期刊;其次,经常访问专业领域有名的实验室、研究员的主页,关注其发表的文章方向及内容;50-100篇,半年;就可以开始动手写文章了。阅读文章的目的。阅读文章的目的有两个主要目的:一是了解世界上本专业领域的内容和发展情况;二是在了解过程中,产生自己的idea,进入这个领域。
能上SCI杂志的文撰稿人至少也是本科以上,审稿这个岗位对于学术要求很高,而本科生尤其是大二根本不具备这个能力,也难怪很多人质疑。
sci审阅也有中国人哦,亲
上次投过一篇2个月发表出来,录用率不太清楚,核心期刊应该对文章要求比较高吧,编辑态度不错,呵呵。《中国肿瘤临床与康复》投稿email:
一般国外期刊至少两个审稿人,也有三个甚至还有六七个的,审稿人会有不同的审稿方位和审稿重点,所以按照审稿人意见逐条仔细修改很重要的,当然主编根据多位审稿人的意见,进行综合后给出最终决定的,所以你在写作时要从审稿人的角度去写作尽量方方面面考虑到,语法、语言组织、论文逻辑结构、图表表达,实验结果配合理论、仿真等会更好,如果是快报,当然可以只给出实验结果也行。只有实验数据的文章,除非创新性很强,一般不会发表在高档期刊的。也许有人认为差一点的杂志档次要求应该低一些,实际上,如果你认为档次差一点的期刊要求低一些,这对你会有害处的,不管档次高低,高标准要求自己是最好的,而且现在低一点档次的期刊投稿数量越来越多,如何在这么多文章中脱颖而出并被录用,高标准是关键因素。