发布时间：
安大成妻子陈珊瑚温和娴淑，手脚勤快，将家业整治地有条不紊，却不得婆婆沈氏欢心。而大成懦弱怕母，亦难替珊瑚说话，不久，珊瑚被沈氏逐出家门。在乡亲帮助下，珊瑚暂居沈氏妹于老太太家中。
通常情况下，都需要参考文献。看以下的要求：
Commentary
Science's Insights section presents analysis by scientists and other experts on issues of interest to Science readers. With the exception of Letters, eLetters, and Technical Comments, most items in this section are commissioned by the editors, but unsolicited contributions are welcome. Perspectives and Policy Forums should include an abstract. Commentary material may be peer reviewed at the Editors' discretion.
SCI 论文发表省钱技巧SCI 论文发表有哪些省钱的技巧？很多作者在投稿时，想让发表率更高一些，又能少花费些。SCI 论文发表，并不难，那么都有哪些省钱技巧呢，下面就给大家具体介绍一下，希望对大家有帮助。 (1) 首先在投稿前，电子版一定要认真的核对，要思路清晰、概念清楚，而且文章中不可以出现太多的空格，因为空格会增加版面费的，许多作者都交过这样的冤枉钱。(2)SCI 论文发表的时候，文章格式可以根据投稿杂志的格式来进行修改，这样审核的编辑会觉得你很用心，可能会比较投机，录取率比较高。(3) 关于科学内容和资料数据一定要正确，你可以找一些专业人士，对文章进行处理，提高成功率。(4) 如果觉得英文翻译做不好，尽量不要用在线翻译，你可以告诉编辑，申请让他们编辑帮助翻译。一般杂志社都会有专业的英文编辑。(5)SCI 论文发表时，最好要注明自己的联系方式，邮箱和电话，方便他人联系。有事情也可以及时与作者沟通，寄发杂志的时候，快递公司也方便联系作者，留下联系方式可以省很多麻烦。(6) 很多作者想了解自己稿件的处理进度，一般好的杂志处理稿件的周期是 3 个月。可以在投稿后一个月打个电话，进行咨询 (一般外审就回来了)；在修改的稿件寄回后 2 周，可以打个电话，咨询一下稿件修改是否合格，并询问什么时候可以刊出; 当您收到校样之后，可以给编辑打个电话，告诉他是否有需要有大的改动，这样彼此都了解一下情况 (因为校样的寄发速度有时很慢，万一杂志送印刷厂就很难改动了)。(7)SCI 论文发表投稿的时间，建议您在需要晋升的前 6 个月投发稿件，这样在晋升前刊登的几率会高一些。(8) 在您投稿的时候，最好先对所在科室投稿的情况，进行统计，把那些处理稿件较快，服务态度好，杂志邮寄迅速快，作为衡量一本期刊的标准，并进行准确分类。最后选出好的期刊。(9) 最后，提醒大家，认真按照批注去修改文章，如果您有不同的想法，也可以在旁边用不同颜色的文字标明。 以上就是对 SCI 论文发表技巧的介绍，能够让自己的文章在 SCI 期刊发表，是一种莫大的荣耀。希望您看过之后会对您有帮助。亲，希望可以帮助到您。
可以不写。写文章简介。亮点什么的。如果喜欢古典文学可以来司马青衫网看看的哈
简单地说明一下文章的内容（创新与特色之处可以强调）和声明无一稿两投即可！Dear Editor: Here within enclosed is our paper for consideration to be published on “***". This study aims to ... our results show that, indicating that......The authors claim that none of the material in the paper has been published or is under consideration for publication elsewhere. Sincerely Yours, ***
Please Enter Comments Enter any comments you would like to send to the editorial office. These comments do not appear in your manuscript. 你任何关于对这篇文章评价的都可以，通常是这篇文章取得了新的研究结果，或者文章综述，相当于内容总体的评价。
please enter comments请输入评论Please enter comments related to the competencies in the comments column.请在评级栏内输入与能力有关的评论。
comments是问你对期刊或编辑有何建议。范围很广，可以表明自己投文章的立场，如本论文是作者花费了足够时间和精力完成的，从未发表过，在申请贵期刊间，不会考虑别的期刊等等。
当然同领域内有作者有利益冲突的研究人员，作者可以在此说明，免得冲突人员做审稿人。发表论文可以咨询。
稿准备。
稿件（Manuscript）：Word / Latex格式，部分期刊使用模板（Template）。
作者（Author）：全体作者姓名、工作单位、地址、邮箱、邮编、ORCID及其他信息。注明第一作者，通讯作者，并列作者，根据要求用不同符号标出（通讯作者常用＊）。
投稿信（Cover Letter）：写明期刊名称，文章类型、文章简介、文章亮点、通讯作者姓名、工作单位、地址、邮箱、邮编等联系方式。
图片（Figures）：Tiff / Eps格式，根据要求调整分辨率（DPI），部分期刊要单独上传。
表格（Tables）：放置在Word文档中。部分期刊要单独上传。
推荐或回避审稿人（Recommended / Opposed Reviewers）：根据要求推荐、回避某位的审稿人。
版权转让协议书（Copyright Transfer Agreement）：根据要求签署（Open Access除外）。
图摘（Table of Contents），可选，根据期刊要求。
附加材料（Supplementary Materials）：非关键性的辅助数据、其他图表、影片、音频等。
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 approved 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: ××××@××××chengyj111(站内联系TA)Originally posted by 在雨中 at 2011-01-26 19:14:36:这个杂志IF 3.几呢，不错的杂志。投稿的时候你说的这些肯定都要准备的。 就是因为3+，所以我完全没信心。chengyj111(站内联系TA)投出去了。等吧。希望自己好运。kaylax(站内联系TA)3+的真比较 难不过那几个应该有模板的3+的真比较 难不过那几个应该有模板的可以参照写就是了 我本来想的是投个PLANT SCIENCE之类2左右的就已经很侥幸了。老板让我试着投3+的。当时正喝水看邮件呢水差点喷到电脑上。。。。我本来想的是投个PLANT SCIENCE之类2左右的就已经很侥幸了。老板让我试着投3+的。当时正喝水看邮件呢水差点喷到电脑上。。。。我本来想的是投个PLANT SCIENCE之类2左右的就已经很侥幸了。老板让我试着投3+的。当时正喝水看邮件呢水差点喷到电脑上。。。。希望我撞大运吧。哎。不行回来另外再投呗 哈哈，等你被3+的杂志录音的时候是不是也会这么激动呢chengyj111(站内联系TA)我有个问题想问一下啊。ONLINE SUBMISSION，初投，我不想把通讯作者留成老板。那样的话一些确认方式都发到老板那里去了。老板。。。我又不好催，等到猴年马月他给我弄。我留的自己，朋友告诉我二审的时候再改成老板就行了。但是现在确认投稿之前期刊将我的材料整成了个PDF。然后前面基本信息里面通讯作者是我自己。后面我的COVER LETTER通讯作者又留的老板。这样行不行啊。
如果你是第一次向这个编辑部投稿，应该另写两篇材料：一是“自我介绍”，如过去写过那些稿件，在那些报刊上发表了什么文章，自巳擅长撰写那一方面的稿件等。二是“稿件介绍”，你送的这篇稿子的写作目的和经过，是否可以删改，如果不采用退回到什么地方（邮编、住址、收件人姓名），必要时给编辑部留个电话号码以便联系。
你知道怎么回复审稿意见么
1.所有问题必须逐条回答。 2.尽量满足意见中需要补充的实验。3.满足不了的也不要回避，说明不能做的合理理由。 4.审稿人推荐的文献一定要引用，并讨论透彻。 以下是本人对审稿人意见的回复一例，仅供参考。续两点经验：1. 最重要的是逐条回答，即使你答不了，也要老实交代；不要太狡猾，以至于耽误事；2. 绝大部分实验是不要真追加的，除非你受到启发，而想改投另外高档杂志----因为你既然已经写成文章，从逻辑上肯定是一个完整的 “story” 了。以上指国际杂志修稿。国内杂志太多，以至于稿源吃紧，基本没有退稿，所以你怎么修都是接受。我的文章水平都不高，主要是没有明显的创新性，也很苦恼。但是除了开始几篇投在国内杂志外，其他都在国际杂志（也都是SCI）发表。以我了解的情况，我单位其他同志给国内杂志投稿，退稿的极少，只有一次被《某某科学进展》拒绝。究其原因，除了我上面说的，另外可能是我单位写稿子还是比较严肃，导师把关也比较严的缘故。自我感觉总结（不一定对）：1）国内杂志审稿极慢（少数除外），但现在也有加快趋势；2）国内杂志编辑人员认真负责的人不多，稿子寄去后，少则几个月，多则一年多没有任何消息；3）国内杂志要求修改的稿子，如果你自己不修，他最后也给你发；4）国外杂志要求补充实验的，我均以解释而过关，原因见少帖）。还因为：很少杂志编辑把你的修改稿再寄给当初审稿人的，除非审稿人特别请求。编辑不一定懂你的东西，他只是看到你认真修改，回答疑问了，也就接受了（当然高档杂志可能不是这样，我的经验只限定一般杂志（影响因子1-5）。欢迎大家批评指正。我常用的回复格式:Dear reviewer:I am very grateful to your comments for the manuscript. According with your advice, we amended the relevant part in manuscript. Some of your questions were answered below.1）2）....引用审稿人推荐的文献的确是很重要的，要想办法和自己的文章有机地结合起来。至于实验大部分都可以不用补做，关键是你要让审稿人明白你的文章的重点是什么，这个实验对你要强调的重点内容不是很必要，或者你现在所用的方法已经可以达到目的就行了。最后要注意，审稿人也会犯错误，不仅仅是笔误也有专业知识上的错误，因为编辑找的审稿人未必是你这个领域的专家。只要自己是正确的就要坚持。在回复中委婉地表达一下你的意见，不过要注意商讨语气哦！我得回复格式是这样的：Dear Professor xx:Thank you very much for your letter dated xxx xx xxxx, and the referees’ reports. Based on your comment and request, we have made extensive modification on the original manuscript. Here, we attached revised manuscript in the formats of both PDF and MS word, for your approval. A document answering every question from the referees was also summarized and enclosed.A revised manuscript with the correction sections red marked was attached as the supplemental material and for easy check/editing purpose.Should you have any questions, please contact us without hesitate.然后再附上Q/A，基本上嘱条回答，写的越多越好（老师语）。结果修改一次就接收了：）我的回复，请老外帮忙修改了Dear Editor:Thank you for your kind letter of “......” on November **, 2005. We revised the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers’ comments, and carefully proof-read the manuscript to minimize typographical, grammatical, and bibliographical errors.Here below is our description on revision according to the reviewers’ comments.Part A (Reviewer 1)1. The reviewer’s comment: ......The authors’ Answer: .....2. The reviewer’s comment: ......The authors’ Answer: ...........Part B (Reviewer 2)1. The reviewer’s comment: ......The authors’ Answer: .....2. The reviewer’s comment: ......The authors’ Answer: ...........Many grammatical or typographical errors have been revised.All the lines and pages indicated above are in the revised manuscript.Thank you and all the reviewers for the kind advice.Sincerely yours,***一个回复的例子(已接收)Major comments: 1. The authors need to strengthen their results by including MMP secretion, and tran-matrigel migration by a positive control progenitor cell population i.e. enriched human CD34 cells obtained from mobilized PBL, since this is a more clinically relevant source of CD34 cells which has also been shown to secrete both MMP-9 and MMP-2 (ref. 11). CD34 enriched cells from steady state peripheral blood which also secrete MMPs are also of interest. 2. In fig 1C please specify which cell line represents MMP-negative cells. This needs to be clarified, as well as a better explanation of the method of the protocol. 3. The ELISA results are represented as "fold increase" compared to control. Instead, we suggest that standards should be used and results should be presented as absolute concentrations and only then can these results be compared to those of the zymography. 4. When discussing the results, the authors should distinguish clearly between spontaneous migration vs chemotactic migration. Furthermore, the high spontaneous migration obtained with cord blood CD34 cells should be compared to mobilized PBL CD34 enriched cells and discussed. 5. The authors claim that the clonogenic assay was performed to determine the optimum concentration for inhibition of MMP activity by phenanthroline and anti MMP-9 mAb, however they should clarify that this assay can only determine the toxicity of the inhibitors and not their optimal inhibitory concentrations.Minor comments: 1. There are many spelling and syntax errors, especially in the results and discussion, which need correction. a. Of special importance, is the percent inhibition of migration, which is described as percent of migration. i.e. pg 7:"Migration of CB CD34 was reduced to 73.3%?" Instead should read "Migration of CB CD34 was reduced by 73.3%?" b. The degree symbol needs to be added to the numbers in Materials and methods. 2. It would be preferable to combine figure 1A and B, in order to confirm the reliability of fig. 1B by a positive control (HT1080).Answer to referee 1 comment: 1. Mobilized peripheral blood is a more clinical source of CD34+ cells, so it is necessary to compare the MMP-9 secretion and trans-migration ability of CB CD34+ cells with that of mobilized PB CD34+ cells. However, we couldn't obtain enough mobilized PB to separate PB CD34+ cells and determine the MMP-9 secretion and migration ability, so we couldn’t complement the study on PB CD34+ cells in this paper. Results obtained by Janowska-Wieczorek et al found that mobilized CD34+ cells in peripheral blood express MMP-9. Furthermore, Domenech’s study showed that MMP-9 secretion is involved in G-CSF induced HPC mobilization. Their conclusions have been added in the discussion. In our present study, our central conclusion from our data is that freshly isolated CD34+ stem/progenitor cells obtained from CB produce MMP-9. 2. MMP-9 negative cell used in fig 1C was Jurkat cell. In zymographic analysis, MMP-9 was not detected in the medium conditioned by Jurkat cell. To exclude that the contaminating cells may play a role in the observed MMP-9 production, we screened the media conditioned by different proportion of CB mononuclear cells with MMP-9 negative cells by zymography. This result may be confusion. Actually, only by detecting the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB mononuclear cells (MNC)/ml (since the purities of CD34+ cell are more than 90%), it could exclude the MNC role. In the revised manuscript, we only detected MMP-9 activity and antigen level in the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB mononuclear cells (MNC)/ml. There is no MMP-9 secretion be detected in the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB MNC/ml. It excluded the possibility that the MMP-9 activity in CB CD34+ cells conditioned medium is due to the contamination by MNC. 3.In this revised paper, we have detected the MMP-9 antigen levels by using commercial specific ELISA kits (R&D System, sensitivity, 0.156ng/ml). Recombinant MMP-9 from R&D System was used as a standard. The results are expressed in the absolute concentration. The absolute concentration result has been added in the paper. As shown in Fig2, MMP-9 levels were detectable in both CB CD34+ cell conditioned medium and BM CD34+ cell conditioned medium. However, MMP-9 level was significantly higher in CB CD34+ cell conditioned medium than in BM CD34+ cell conditioned medium (0.406±0.133ng/ml versus 0.195±0.023ng/ml). Although gelatinolytic activity was not detected in media conditioned by CD34+ cells from BM, sensitivity of ELISA favors the detection of MMP-9 antigen in the BM CD34+. 4. In our study, to establish the direct link between MMP-9 and CB CD34+ cells migration, we only determined the role of MMP-9 in spontaneous migration of CB CD34+ cells, but not in chemotactic migration. Actually, regulation of hematopoietic stem cell migration, homing and anchorage of repopulation cells to the bone marrow involves a complex interplay between adhesion molecules, chemokines, cytokines and proteolytic enzymes. Results obtained by the groups of Voermans reveal that not only the spontaneous migration but also the SDF-1 induced migration of CB CD34+ cells is greatly increased in comparison to CD34+ cells from BM and peripheral blood. 5. CD34+ cells we obtained in each cord blood sample were very limited. It is not enough to screen the inhibitors concentrations to select the optimal inhibitory concentrations. In the blocking experiments, based on the concentrations used by others and the manufacturer's recommendation, we then determined the inhibitors concentrations by excluding the toxicity of the inhibitors in that concentration, which was determined by clonogenic assay.Minor comments:1.The spelling and syntax errors have been checked and corrected.2.Since the results in figure 1A and B were obtained from two separated and parallel experiments, it is not fitness to combine two figures.
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 approved 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: ××××@××××chengyj111(站内联系TA)Originally posted by 在雨中 at 2011-01-26 19:14:36:这个杂志IF 3.几呢，不错的杂志。投稿的时候你说的这些肯定都要准备的。 就是因为3+，所以我完全没信心。chengyj111(站内联系TA)投出去了。等吧。希望自己好运。kaylax(站内联系TA)3+的真比较 难不过那几个应该有模板的3+的真比较 难不过那几个应该有模板的可以参照写就是了 我本来想的是投个PLANT SCIENCE之类2左右的就已经很侥幸了。老板让我试着投3+的。当时正喝水看邮件呢水差点喷到电脑上。。。。我本来想的是投个PLANT SCIENCE之类2左右的就已经很侥幸了。老板让我试着投3+的。当时正喝水看邮件呢水差点喷到电脑上。。。。我本来想的是投个PLANT SCIENCE之类2左右的就已经很侥幸了。老板让我试着投3+的。当时正喝水看邮件呢水差点喷到电脑上。。。。希望我撞大运吧。哎。不行回来另外再投呗 哈哈，等你被3+的杂志录音的时候是不是也会这么激动呢chengyj111(站内联系TA)我有个问题想问一下啊。ONLINE SUBMISSION，初投，我不想把通讯作者留成老板。那样的话一些确认方式都发到老板那里去了。老板。。。我又不好催，等到猴年马月他给我弄。我留的自己，朋友告诉我二审的时候再改成老板就行了。但是现在确认投稿之前期刊将我的材料整成了个PDF。然后前面基本信息里面通讯作者是我自己。后面我的COVER LETTER通讯作者又留的老板。这样行不行啊。
可以不写。写文章简介。亮点什么的。如果喜欢古典文学可以来司马青衫网看看的哈
Comments: 对自己欲投稿作品的自评或他评意见或者期刊编辑办公室工作。
简单说一下文章的特色新意, 写上文章的创新点, 以便于编辑选择审稿人。
要。comment直的是论文或发布在期刊上的作品文章，该文章是需要通过审稿的，审核之后才可以通过，或者发布。审稿是编辑人员的一种职能，编辑人员对作者创作的文字、图像等材料(原稿)为对象所进行的判断。
简单地说明一下文章的内容（创新与特色之处可以强调）和声明无一稿两投即可！Dear Editor: Here within enclosed is our paper for consideration to be published on “***". This study aims to ... our results show that, indicating that......The authors claim that none of the material in the paper has been published or is under consideration for publication elsewhere. Sincerely Yours, ***
remark 所表示的“说话”含有评论性的意思。例如，在学生的演讲比赛结束时，班长请在场的师长讲讲话，这种讲话是remark而不是任何其他的词 review 只有名词是“评论” 动词：vt. & vi.写…的评论文章；vt.回顾comment 我觉得更偏向“议论，批评”（comment这是我自己的看法）
remark和comment的区别为：指代不同、用法不同、侧重点不同。
一、指代不同
1、remark：评述。
2、comment：议论，评论。
二、用法不同
1、remark：remark用作名词的意思是“话”，转化为动词表示“评论”。还可表示“注意”，有注意到某人某事物的含义。
2、comment：comment的基本意思是“发表意见，提出看法”，一般是指有一定权威的人对某事或某人发表看法。comment一般用作不及物动词，后面常接介词on或upon，表示“就(某人〔某事〕)发表看法，评论(某人等)”，comment也可用作及物动词，这时后跟that从句。
三、侧重点不同
1、remark：更偏重于：提及，谈论，有些随意性。
2、comment：仅表达 “评论、发表意见”。