发布时间：
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.
《Carbon》是SCI收录期刊收录的刊物，影响因子是7.41。
《Carbon》杂志是一个国际多学科论坛，旨在交流碳材料和碳纳米材料领域的科学进展。期刊报道了与碳的形成、结构、性质、行为和技术应用相关的重要新发现，碳是一类主要由元素碳组成的有序或无序固相。
这些材料可以是合成材料，也可以是天然材料，包括但不限于氧化石墨烯和氧化石墨烯、碳纳米管、碳纤维和丝、石墨、多孔碳、热解碳、玻璃碳、炭黑、金刚石和类金刚石碳、富勒烯和炭。如果碳成分是论文科学内容的一个主要焦点，则将考虑有关复合材料的论文。
如果有机物质是此类碳材料的前体，则可考虑使用有关有机物质的论文。碳材料的相关应用领域包括但不限于电子和光子器件、结构和热应用、智能材料和系统、储能和转换、催化、环境保护以及生物和医学。 碳出版综合研究文章、致编辑的信函，并邀请该领域的主要专家进行评论。
选择具有较高科学价值、传授重要新知识、对国际碳材料界具有高度兴趣的论文。该杂志欢迎大量和纳米级碳材料的手稿，特别对帮助定义和发展适用于所有碳的基础科学的手稿感兴趣，包括现有和新兴材料。
CARBON简介
CARBON杂志属于工程技术行业，“材料科学：综合”子行业的优秀级杂志。 投稿难度评价：中等偏上杂志，要求也较高，此区杂志很多，但是投中，并不容易 审稿速度：一般，3-6周级别/热度：暗红评语：杂志级别不错，但是比较冷门，关注人数偏少。
说明：指数是根据中国科研工作者（含医学临床，基础，生物，化学等学科）对SCI杂志的认知度，熟悉程度，以及投稿的量等众多指标综合评定而成。当然，具体的，您还可以结合“投稿经验分享系统”，进行综合判断，这更是大家的实战经验，更值得分享和参考。
注意，上述热门指数采用专利技术，由计算机系统自动计算，并给出建议，存在不准确的可能，仅供您投稿选择杂志时参考。
以上内容参考：Carbon(SCI收录期刊) - 百度百科
在c刊上发表论文需要原始数据吗职称驿站2022-12-08 18:16河北关注c刊需要原始数据吗？一般不需要。原始数据不是发表c刊必须提交的必要材料，但不代表发表过程中一定不需要。建议作者保存好与文章有关的原始数据，根据c刊方是否要求确定是否需要。写作文章的内容，往往离不开原始数据的分析和统计。当投稿c刊之后，期刊方的编辑以及审稿人，就会对文章的查重率、格式体例、出版道理政策、创新性、设计方案的合理性、结论的客观性、分析统计方法的科学性和逻辑性等方面进行审核论证。审核论证过程中，审稿人不需要依据原始数据，就能得出公正客观的评审结论，就不需要原始数据。一旦某一结论，审稿人需要借助原始数据才能判断是否合理、科学、客观，则需要原始数据。即c刊是否需要原始数据，受具体文章的实际情况影响，可能需要，也可能不需要。原始数据，涉及到作者的著作权，一般c刊方没有必要的话，不会要求作者提供原始数据。不过，c刊方需要原始数据的时候，作者得有，否则很容易导致投稿被拒。总的来说，作者要保存好原始数据，以备不时之需。如果投稿的c刊通过在线系统或者邮件告知作者，提供原始数据了，作者及时提交即可。如果没有要求提供，就静等审核发表的结果。SCOPUS/EI/SCI/ISTP/CPCI/SSCI期刊推荐、论文咨询等高端学术服务欢迎关注私信我
对于部分期刊，在提交manuscript时，可能会要求诸如highlight或者novelty statement之类的说明。其实个人认为这两个和cover Letter以及论文中的Abstract以及Conclusion是非常接近的，很多情况下只是侧重点不太一样而已。 对于novelty statement，一般在作者指南中会如下写到： The statement of novelty must not be a retelling of the abstract. When preparing the statement please make sure to address (a) the significance and novelty of the work, with respect to existing 从字面上来看就是让作者自己对自己的文章有一个新颖性评价.因为论文很长,编辑的工作量太大,不可能在很短的时间内把你的文章看完,他只需要了解你文章的大概内容就行了.在短时间内了解你的论文内容只能通过两方面:一摘要;二新颖性.他通过摘要了解你都做了些什么,结果如何?和所投期刊的要求是否相符.通过新颖性来了解你文章的创意,然后决定是否送审.因此,新颖性评价是文章投递过程中关键的内容.一定要写好.但是,很多期刊对新颖性评价只要一两句就行了.因此,新颖性评价不宜写得太多,但一定要事实求事的突出自己文章的创意.让编辑觉得你的新颖性评价确实反映了文章的创意. 我觉得这个问题很好解决，既然你决定了投这个杂志，你应该知道“why the work should be published” 至于novelty，你想想你的work到底哪有创新了，如果想不出来，也就证明你的introduction最后的部分没有写好，不建议立即投稿了。 下面是一个例子： Sensitive and stable amperometric measurements at ionic liquid–carbon paste microelectrodes DOI：10.1016/j.aca.2007.11.012
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。
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
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。