如何回复审稿人意见.doc

如何回复英文论文编辑部的修改意见Response to Editor and Reviewer 这是我的英文修改稿回复信 Dear Editor,RE: Manuscript IDWe would like to thank XXX (name of Journal) for giving us the opportunity to revise our manuscript.We thank the reviewers for their careful read and thoughtful comments on previous draft. We have carefully taken their comments into consideration in preparing our revision, which has resulted in a paper that is clearer, more compelling, and broader. The following summarizes how we responded to reviewer comments.Below is our response to their comments.Thanks for all the help. Best wishes, Dr. XXXCorresponding Author 下面是如何对Reviewer的意见进行point by point回答：一些习惯用语如下： Revision authors response Reviewer #1:Major comments 1. The referee correctly noted that our language about XXX was ambiguous. Therefore, we changed the text and the figures to emphasize that . To further support the concept that, we have analyzed . As depicted in Supplementary Fig. S12. As suggested by the reviewer we have emphasized our observations of XXX in results and discussion sections. We have added new findings (see above point) in Supplementary Fig S. to support3. As requested by the reviewer we have added a scheme (Supplementary Fig.) that summarizes Minor comments 1. We have removed the word SUFFICIENT from the title.2. We have added and improved the scale bars in the figure 1 and 2.3. We have added statistics to Fig 5C.4. We have corrected the typescript errors in the XXX paragraph. Reviewer #2: 1. Because of the reviewers request, we have performed new experiments to better clarify The new Fig. shows that This finding suggests that2. As suggested by the reviewer we have added new data of XXX to clarify the point that3. We agree with the reviewer that Because of the reviewers request we have used XXX to confirm that The new data are depicted in Supplementary Fig .4. Because of reviewers request, we have analyzed the efficiency of RNAi by quantitative RT-PCR the efficiency of RNAi. We have now added the new panel in Supplementary Fig. Reviewer #3: 1. Because of the referees comment, we have moved the panel of Fig. 5 into the new Figure 6 and we have added new experiments to address . The new Fig. 6 shows that.2. In response to the reviewers requests, we have studied. The new data are depicted in Suppplementary Fig.3. We agree with reviewer that. However, a recent paper has shown that . We have added this reference and modified the sentence to underline.4. We have changes Figure 1 with a picture that. The previous one was too week and the green fluorescence was lost during the conversion in PDF format.5. Because of reviews request, we have changed as much as possible the magnification in order to maintain the same scale bar but also to preserve details.6. The difference between XXX and XXX is not statistically significant. In order to better clarify this issue we changed the graphics of our statistical analysis in Fig. 另外一篇5分杂志的回复： 1nd Revision authors response Referee #1:We want to begin by thanking Referee #1 for writing that “the finding in our manuscript is generally interesting and important in the field.” We also appreciated the constructive criticism and suggestion. We addressed all the points raised by the reviewer, as summarized below.1. According to the referees suggestion, the experiment demonstrating; in the new experiment, this result is presented in the revised Fig.2. The referee suggests demonstrating that. This experiment was performed in XXX by comparing3. The referee comments that it is unclear whether the effect of .is due to . To address the referees comment, we revised Fig. and demonstrated that. To further confirm. Two new data have been added in the revised Fig. In summary, the results in Fig. demonstrate that.4. Thanks to the referees comment, the wrong figure numbers were corrected in the revised manuscript. Referee #2:We want to thank Referee #2 for constructive and insightful criticism and advice. We addressed all the points raised by the reviewer as summarized below.1. The referee recommends to show. We performed the experiment and its result is included in the revised Fig.2. According to the referees suggestion, the experiments in Fig. were repeated several times and representative data are included in the revised Fig.3. Based on the referees comment that, echoing comment #4 of Referee #1, above. As stated above, we have included new results, which include:4. All minor points raised by the reviewer were corrected accordingly. 2nd Revision authors response We would like to thank the referees for their thoughtful review of our manuscript. We believe that the additional changes we have made in response to the reviewers comments have made this a significantly stronger manuscript. Below is our point-by-point response to the referees comments. Referee #1:Referee #1 request two minor editorial changes. Both changes have been made accordingly in the revised manuscript. Referee #2:We sincerely apologize to Referee #2 for not completely addressing all of the points raised in the previous response. We have done so below and added additional data in hopes that this reviewer will be supportive of publication.1. Referee #2 requests evidence that . According to the referees suggestion, a XXX assay was performed in XXX cells to demonstrate that . The result is presented in Fig.2. Page 17, “the” E3 was changed to “an” E3.3. Referee #2 asks whether. We would like to note that we investigated .in our previous study and found no evidence that . Therefore, in this manuscript we focused on .