介绍信 是用来介绍联系接洽事宜的一种应用文体，下面我为大家带来一些sci投稿介绍信模板，望大家采纳。
一、最初投稿
Cover letter Dear Editors:
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: ××××@××××
二、催稿信
Dear Prof. ×××:
Sorry for disturbing you. I am not sure if it is the right time to contact you to inquire about the status of my submitted manuscript titled “Paper Title”. (ID: 文章 稿号), although the status of “With Editor” has been lasting for more than two months, since submitted to journal three months ago. I am just wondering that my manuscript has been sent to reviewers or not? I would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time check the status for us. I am very pleased to hear from you on the reviewer’s comments.
Thank you very much for your consideration. Best regards! Yours sincerely, ××××××
Corresponding author:
Name: ×××
E-mail: ××××@××××
三、修改稿
Cover letter
Dear Dr/ Prof..(写上负责你文章编辑的姓名，显得尊重，因为第一次的投稿不知道具体负责的编辑，只能用通用的Editors):
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Paper Title”. (ID: 文章稿号).
We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision which marked in red in the paper. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration. We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you and best regards. Yours sincerely, ××××××
Corresponding author: Name: ×××
E-mail: ××××@××××
投稿信的重要性
查尔斯沃思论文润色编辑认为投稿信是非常重要的，尽管在线提交文章的系统盛行，但投稿信可以告诉杂志及其编辑为什么他们应该考虑你的文章。这是特别重要的，因为当初审编辑在筛选你的论文时，就此决定是否在同行评审环节中寻找特定的专家，所以期刊欢迎增加对你研究的简要总结。
以下是论文润色编辑对如何撰写投稿信的一些建议：
始终检查期刊的撰写人笔记 - 许多期刊都有模板或具体建议他们期望您包括什么。
简要说明：尽量将您的信件保存在一页，除非有特殊原因需要添加更多详细信息。重要的是要简洁。
查尔斯沃思论文语言润色编辑告诉你投稿信一定要包括以下内容：
●您的完整联系方式
●写信给具体的期刊编辑，或写“亲爱的编辑”。表明你知道编辑的名字是一个好的征兆，你提交之前评估的日记。（不要使用称呼“亲爱的先生”，特别是因为许多编辑是女性！）
●在标题开头，日志范围以及您的文章为什么相关。这是至关重要的，因为它会“标记”到期刊，无论您的文章是否在期刊的宗旨和范围内。
●描述你的方法和研究结果目的是让编辑知道为什么你的研究是新颖的。
●简要说明主要结果和结论。
●如果期刊政策允许或可以自己邀请，那么您还可以为您的论文推荐潜在审稿人的详细信息。请务必检查审稿人的详细信息是否正确和有效。
●确保您的论文没有提交到另一个杂志 - 一般的“规则”是期刊不考虑正在接受其他期刊审查的论文。
来自SPIE（spie.org）的一个有用的模板在下面粘贴，可能有助于指导您遵循的主要标准：
[YourName]
[YourAffiliation]
[YourAddress]
[Date]
Dear Dr. [Editor name],
I/We wish to submit a new manuscriptentitled “[title of article]” for consideration by the [journal name].
I/We confirm that this work is original andhas not been published elsewhere nor is it currently under consideration forpublication elsewhere.
In this paper, I/we report on _______. Thisis significant because __________. Thepaper should be of interest to readers in the areas of __________.
[Please explain in your own words thesignificance and novelty of the work, the problem that is being addressed, andwhy the manuscript belongs in this journal. Do not simply insert your abstractinto your cover letter! Briefly describe the research you are reporting in yourpaper, why it is important, and why you think the readership of the journalwould be interested in it.]
Please address all correspondenceconcerning this manuscript to me at [email address].
Thank you for your consideration of thismanuscript.
Sincerely,
[Yourname]
参考：查尔斯沃思论文润色小贴士
SCI
投稿信件模板
一、投稿信
1. Dear Dr. XXX
I
am
sending
a
manuscript
entitled
“
XXXX
”
by
XXXX,
which
I
should
like
to
submit
for
possible publication in the journal of XXXX.
Yours sincerely
2. Dear Dr. XXX
Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “
XXX
” by
XXX, which we are submitting for publication in
the journal of XXX. We have chosen this journal because it deals with XXX. We believe that sth
would be of interest to the journal’s readers.
3. Dear Dr. XXX
Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “
XXX
” by sb. All authors
have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the
integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of
interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed
letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source.
We
appreciate
your
consideration
of
our
manuscript,
and
we
look
forward
to
receiving
comments from the reviewers.
二、询问有无收到稿件
Dear Editor,
We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive
acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if
you
would
let
us
know
whether
or
not
you
have
received
them.
If
not,
we
will
send
our
manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help.
三、询问论文审查回音
Dear Editor,
It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in
your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a
decision. I should appreciate your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible.
四、关于论文的总体审查意见
1.
This
is
a
carefully
done
study
and
the
findings
are
of
considerable
interest.
A
few
minor
revision are list below.
2.
This
is
a
well-written
paper
containing
interesting
results
which
merit
publication.
For
the
benefit
of
the
reader,
however,
a
number
of
points
need
clarifying
and
certain
statements
require further justification. There are given below.
3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our
knowledge
of
the
subject
sufficiently
to
warrant
publication
in
PNAS.
We
suggest
that
the
authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as XXX.
4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added.
5.
This
manuscript
is
not
suitable
for
publication
in
the
journal
of
–
because
the
main
observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of XXX.
6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will
see,
I
have
made
some
correction
at
the
beginning
of
the
paper
where
some
syntax
is
not
satisfactory.
7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate
the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of
someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker.
8. The
wording
and
style of some section, particularly those
concerning
HPLC, need careful
editing.
Attention
should
be
paid
to
the
wording
of
those
parts
of
the
Discussion
of
and
Summary which have been underlined.
9.
Preliminary
experiments
only
have
been
done
and
with
exception
of
that
summarized
in
Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so
much variation between assays.
10.
The
condition
of incubation
are
poorly
defined. What
is
the
temperature? Were
antibody
used?
五、给编辑的回信
1. In reply to the
referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that
XXX
One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture
in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3,
paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result.
2.
I
have
read
the
referee’s
comments
very
carefully
and
conclude
that
the
paper
has
been
rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table
in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than
an error or omission.
3. Thank you for your letter of XXX
and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript
entitled “
XXX
”. We hav
e studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we
hope meet with their approval.
4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the
referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findin
gs are confirmed.
5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised
portion are underlined in red.
6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful
and have revised the manuscript.
7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence.
8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for
publication in Cancer Research with minor revision.
9.
We
have
therefore
completed
a
further
series
of
experiments,
the
result
of
which
are
summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account.
10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper.
11.
I
feel
that
the
reviewer’s
comments
co
ncerning
Figures
1
and
2
results
from
a
misinterpretation of the data.
12. We would have included a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been
available.
13. We
prefer
to
retain
the
use
of
Table
4
for
reasons
that
it
should
be
clear
from
the
new
paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section.
