英文论文写作、投稿详解(整理各大学术论坛相关帖子)
目前科技论文作者向国际英文科技期刊投稿的方式有三种。一是传统的邮寄形式，即通过国际快件将论文的原稿邮寄给刊物的主编或编辑部。这种形式曾经是投稿的近乎唯一的方式，持续了漫长的岁月，可现在采用这种方式接受来稿的刊物越来越少了。二是用电子邮件的方式投稿，即作者将原稿的电子文件发至主编或编辑部的电子信箱。这种投稿方式显然比邮寄快得多，但与邮寄一样，稿件也有丢失的时候。目前采用这种纳稿方式的期刊还很多，但有很大一部分期刊己经在此基础上，又进了一步，发展到第三种也是目前最新的一种投稿方式，即网上投稿 (ON-LINE SUBMISSION)。这种方式速度快，而且稿件不会丢失。一旦作者在网上登记注册投稿，每个主要步骤都有记录，很受科技期刊作者的欢迎。本文将就网上投稿过程及作者应该注意的地方予以详细的介绍，供对此感兴趣的中国作者参考。
网上投稿的关键是要做好充分的准备工作。首先，作者对所要投稿的国际英文刊物的投稿需知(GUIDE FOR AUTHORS)要了解清楚，并且按照要求准备好原稿的所有文件。一般科技论文分为回顾性文章(REVIEW ARTICLE)，普通论文(REGULAR/RESEARCH ARTICLE)，快讯(SHORT COMMUNICATIONS)等。不同的文章类型，对原稿的格式要求也有所变化。单就普通论文而言，文章从头到尾的基本格式是：论文的开篇部分，包括文章标题(TITLE)，作者姓名(AUTHOR’S NAME)(注明通讯作者/CORRESPONDING AUTHOR)，作者单位地址(AFFILIATION)，论文摘要(ABSTRACT)，关键词(KEYWORDS)等；论文的正文部分，包括介绍/引言(INTRODUCTION)，实验方法(METHOD)，实验材料(MATERIAL)，结果与分析(RESULTS AND ANALYSIS)，讨论（DISCUSSION）, 结论（CONCLUSION）等；需说明的是不同的学科，正文的内容和形式会有所增减，图表、公式的数量也会有所不同。正文后的结尾部分有的文章附加致谢辞(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)，有的则没有，但参考文献(REFERENCE)则是必须的。有的文章还带有附录(APPENDIX)，如全部的实验原始数据、计算机软件程序等。现在有的刊物可以在网上发表的文章中附带电子视听文件(E-COMPONENTS)。如短录像片(VIDEO CLIP)，动画片(SHORT CARTOON)等。作者要根据自身的情况，选择文章应该包含的内容，一旦确定，所有的内容都要在网上投稿前准备好。此外，不但原稿的内容和格式要符合刊物的要术，而且在字数、页数、格式、文件储存形式等方面，均要与投稿刊物的要求一致。否则，文章在初选阶段会很快落选。其次，是作者对投稿刊物网上投稿系统的熟悉和学习。如果可能，最好请有这方面经验的作者上一课，可以节省时间和事半功倍。如果找不到合适的老师，作者自己要耐心地自学。从刊物的网页入手，仔细阅读网上的投稿需知、跟踪链接或屏幕启示，把每个环节搞明白弄清楚。
在网上投稿，头一步是在网页上注册，也叫作者登记。实际上与网上购物注册没太大区别，关键是要把自己的姓名、单位、联系地址，包括电话、传真和电子邮箱等登记准确无误。二是按部就班地输入文章的各个主要部分。如题目、作者、摘要、关键词、正文、图表等。在输入每个部分的时候，一是要通读该部分的有关要求，再次确认自已输入的文件是否符合要求。这听起来并不难，但实际上作者在这方面的疏忽却很多。比如按要求，原稿不能超过20页，可有的原稿长达40多页，甚至更长。有的文章作者完全忽略了刊物对关键词的要求，随心所欲。二是确认每个部分输入的完整性。有些作者在输入文件时过于匆忙，十个图只输入一半，这样的稿件即使到了编辑部也不能送审，只能返回作者补漏。如果审校员一时疏忽或主编没有查觉，将有缺欠的文章发出送审，则审稿人因为缺图，不能正常审阅文章。这样造成的麻烦所耽误的时间会更多。三是输入文件完毕后，也就是所有的部分成功地输入后，不要忘了点击投稿发送键。否则，稿件只会存储在作者自已的文件夹中，而不是发到编辑部。目前，许多科技期刊网上投稿，需把文件由一种存储形式转换到另一种存储形式，比如DOC文件变成PDF文件。在这个转换过程中，计算机屏幕会呈停滞状态，看上去好像死机了。其实不然，只需耐心等待罢了。原稿在网上成功投出后，作者马上就能收到编辑部的回执。如果有问题，屏幕上则会出现问题预警或解决问题的提示。如果作者不能自行解决故障或问题反复出现，作者可与出版社的网上投稿支持部门联系，求得帮助。此外值得一提的是，部分著名出版社的网页上除附有投稿需知外，还专门设计了针对网上投稿的指导示范文件。作者初学乍练时可以抽时间学习一下。总之，网上投稿并不难，关键是准备充分，而且在实际上机操作时按部就班，不能单纯求快，否则欲速而不达。
编辑部收到稿件后，有的是直接送审，有的是先进行一步初选(主要是检查论文的英文是否过关)，然后再送审。不论是哪种情况，论文在送审前均需通过最基本的技术检查。目的是看原稿是否包含了应该有的基本内容。有些刊物的编辑部就设在出版社内，这类期刊的检查会更全面，包括文件形式、内容、作者联系方式、文章是否属于重复性投稿等等。一旦发现问题(比如原稿过长，关键词不符合要求等)，原稿会马上返回作者，进行必要的补充和修改。原稿一旦退回作者，文件便会重新回到作者自己在网上的投稿文件夹里，等候修改。与此同时，作者的电子信箱内同样会收到一封编辑部的来信，明确告之稿件应该进行修改或补充的地方。作者只需上网从自己的文件夹中调出文件修改即可。一旦文件修改完毕，作者又要根据出版社信函中的提示，上网按步骤再将原稿发回刊物的编辑部。这个操作过程和最开始的投稿大同小异，往往也要将DOC文件转换成PDF文件。原稿返回编辑部送审后，有的会很干脆地被拒绝，有的会顺利地圆满接受，但大部分原稿需按审稿人的意见进行规模不同的修改。经过作者修改过的稿件又需要在网上重新发回编辑部。但有的作者在接到主编或编辑部转来的审稿人意见后，对其评价有很大的异议或不愿改动自己的论文，便可以主动要求退稿。手续很简单，只需向编辑部发个电子邮件即可或自己上网撤稿。如果作者愿意根据审稿人的意见改动论文，则需改得全面彻底，并且对审稿人提出的疑问要一一做答。这份单独的问答要整理成一份单独的文件，在网上再次发稿时使用。如果缺少这份问答文件，在许多期刊网上投发修改稿时会出现障碍，应引起作者的注意。修改后的论文要从作者网上的论文文件夹里发给编辑部，最初的原稿可以存储在文件夹中，可作者一定要确定第二次投出的稿件是修改后的文件，而不是初稿。这种张冠李戴的事在网上投稿过程中时有发生。文件名称明明显示是修改稿，可审稿人打开文件后才发现是初稿又原封不动地回来了，让人有点哭笑不得。修改过的稿件回到编辑部后，原稿的编码序号不变，只是多了一或二个尾数，表明是修改稿。有的稿件改动一次即可被刊物采纳，但也有的要反复修改多次才能被通过。对被否定的文章，如果作者对否定的原因有异议，可以向编辑部或主编提出自己的意见，据理力争。如果主编同意作者的意见，文章可以重新进入新的一轮审稿程序。这种情况不多，但在网上这样的文章也同样记录在案。在网上投出的稿件不论改动多少回，其序号都不会改变，只有尾数的变动，以表明是修改后的第几稿。比如R1是第一次修改稿，R2是第二份修改稿，依此类推。但每份修改过的文件在网上都有记录，而且每份审稿人的意见也都记录在案。不单如此，整个审稿过程中经过刊物网页发给作者的电子邮件也都有记录。总之，每一个步骤都有据可查，只要整个系统不出问题，就不会有稿件丢失的情况发生。
由此可见，网上投稿的好处的确很多，难怪深受广大作者的欢迎。现在有许多科技期刊已经告别了邮寄和电子邮件的时代，开始只受理网上投稿。今后，这样的期刊可能会越来越多。所以，能自如地驾驭好网上投稿这个新的投稿手段，对学者们而言无疑是件好事。
附录1.SCI投稿信件的一些套话
1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML:
I am sending a manuscript entitled “” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - .
Yours sincerely
2. Dear Dr. A:
Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers.
3. Dear Dr. A:
Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “” 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 Editors,
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 Editors，
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 appreciated 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 –
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 - .
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 –
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 – and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “”. We have 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 findings 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 concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data.
12. We would have include 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.
14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential.
15. The running title has been changed to “”.
16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase.
17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error.
18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2).
19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added.
20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4.
21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are:
22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication.
23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication.
24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper.
25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees.
附录2.Elsevier 投稿各种状态总结
1. Submitted to Journal当上传结束后，显示的状态是Submitted to Journal，这个状态 是自然形成的无需处理。
2. With editor如果在投稿的时候没有要求选择编辑，就先到主编那，主编会分派给别的编 辑。这当中就会有另两个状态：
3. Editor assigned
4. Editor Declined Invitation
如果编辑接手处理了就会邀请审稿人了。
5. Reviewer(s) invited
如果审稿人接受那就会是以下状态：
6. Under review
这应该是一个漫长的等待。当然前面各步骤也可能很慢的，要看编辑的处理情况。 如果被邀请审稿人不想审，就会decline，编辑会重新邀请别的审稿人。
7. required review completed 审稿结束，等编辑处理。
8. Decision in Process到了这一步就快要有结果了，编辑开始考虑是给修改还是直接拒， 当然也有可能直接接受的，但可能性很小，呵呵。
9. Minor revision/Major revision这个时候可以稍微庆祝一下了，问题不大了，因为有修 改就有可能。具体怎么改就不多说了，谦虚谨慎是不可少的。
10. Revision Submitted to Journal
又开始了一个循环。
11. Accepted如果不要再审，只是小修改，编辑看后会马上显示这个状态，但如果要再审也会有上面的部分状态。一步会比较快，但也有慢的。看杂志的。
还有个状态是Rejected。希望不要出现。其他库的状态，基本是大同小异，供参考：
附录3.一些常见的英文文章语言技巧
a)如何指出当前研究的不足以及有目的地引导出自己的研究的重要性。通常在叙述了前人成果之后，用However来引导不足，比如
However, little information..
little attention...
little work...
little data
little research
or few studies
few investigations...
few researchers...
few attempts...
or no
none of these studies
has (have) been less
done on ...
focused on
attempted to
conducted
investigated
studied
(with respect to)
Previous research (studies, records) has (have)
failed to consider
ignored
misinterpreted
neglected to
overestimated, underestimated
misleaded
thus, these previus results are
inconclisive, misleading, unsatisfactory, questionable, controversial..
Uncertainties (discrepancies) still exist ...
这种引导一般提出一种新方法，或者一种新方向。如果研究的方法以及方向和前人一样，可以通过下面的方式强调自己工作的作用：
However, data is still scarce
rare
less accurate
there is still dearth of
We need to
aim to
have to
provide more documents
data
records
studies
increase the dataset
Further studies are still necessary...
essential...
为了强调自己研究的重要性，一般还要在However之前介绍自己研究问题的反方面，另一方面等等
比如：
1)时间问题
如果你研究的问题时间上比较新，你就可以大量提及对时间较老的问题的研究及重要性，然后说(However)，对时间尺度比较新的问题研究不足
2)物性及研究手段问题
如果你要应用一种新手段或者研究方向，你可以提出当前比较流行的方法以及物质性质，然后说对你所研究的方向和方法，研究甚少。
3)研究区域问题
首先总结相邻区域或者其它区域的研究，然后强调这一区域研究不足
4)不确定性
虽然前人对这一问题研究很多，但是目前有两种或者更多种的观点，
这种uncertanties, ambiguities，值得进一步澄清
5)提出自己的假设来验证
如果自己的研究完全是新的，没有前人的工作进行对比，在这种情况下，你可以自信地说，根据提出的过程，存在这种可能的结果，本文就是要证实这种结果。
We aim to test the feasibility (reliability) of the ...
It is hoped that the qutestion will be resolved (fall away) with our proposed
method (approach).
提出自己的观点
We aim to
This paper reports on
provides results
extends the method..
focus on
The purpose of this paper is to
Furthermore, Moreover, In addition,, we will also discuss...
c) 圈定自己的研究范围
前言的另外一个作用就是告诉读者包括(reviewer)你的文章主要研究内容。如果处理不好，reviewer会提出严厉的建议，比如你没有考虑某种可能性，某种研究手段等等。为了减少这种争论，在前言的结尾你就要明确提出本文研究的范围：
1)时间尺度问题
如果你的问题涉及比较长的时序，你可以明确地提出本文只关心这 一时间范围的问题。
We preliminarily focus on the older (younger)...
或者有两种时间尺度的问题 (long-term and short term)，你可以说两者都重要，但是本文只涉及其中一种
2) 研究区域的问题
和时间问题一样，明确提出你只关心这一地区
d) 最后的原场
在前言的最后，还可以总结性地提出，这一研究对其它研究的帮助。或者说，further studies on ... will be summarized in our next study (or elsewhere)
总之，其目的就是让读者把思路集中到你要讨论的问题上来。减少争论(arguments).
关于词汇以及常用结构，要经常总结，多读多模仿才能融会贯通。
以上是常见的语言结构，不算抄袭。
怎样提出观点
在提出自己的观点时，采取什么样的策略很重要。不合适的句子通常会遭到reviewer的置疑。
1)如果观点不是这篇文章最新提出的，通常要用
We confirm that...
2)对于自己很自信的观点,可用
We believe that...
3)在更通常的情况下，由数据推断出一定的结论，
用， Results indicate, infer, suggest, imply that...
4) 在及其特别的情况才可以用We put forward
(discover, observe..) .. "for the first time".
来强调自己的创新。
5) 如果自己对所提出的观点不完全肯定，可用
We tentatively put forward (interrprete this to..)
Or The results may be due to (caused by) attributed to
rsulted from..
Or This is probably a consequence of
It seems that .. can account for (interpret) this..
Or It is pisible that it stem from...
连接词与逻辑
写英文论文最常见的一个毛病就是文章的逻辑不清楚。解决的方法有：
1)句子上下要有连贯，不能让句子之间独立
常见的连接词语有, However, also, in addition,
consequently, afterwards, moreover, Furthermore,
further, although, unlike, in contrast, Similarly,
Unfortunately, alternatively, parallel results,
In order to, despite, For example, Compared with
other results, thus, therefore...
用好这些连接词，能够使观点表达得有层次，更加明确。
比如，如果叙述有时间顺序的事件或者文献，
最早的文献可用AA advocated it for the first time.
接下来，可用Then BB further demonstrated that..
再接下来，可用Afterwards, CC..
如果还有，可用More recent studies by DD..
如果叙述两种观点，要把它们截然分开
AA pput forward that...
In contrast, BB believe
or Unlike AA, BB suggest
or On the contrary (表明前面的观点错误，如果只是表明
两种对立的观点，用in contrast)， BB..
如果两种观点相近,可用
AA suggest
Similarily, alternatively, BB..
Or Also, BB
or BB allso does ..
表示因果或者前后关系，可用
Consequently, therefore, as a result,
表明递进关系，可用furthermore, further, moreover, in addition,
当写完一段英文，最好首先检查一下是否较好地应用了这些连接词。
2) 段落的整体逻辑
经常我们要叙述一个问题的几个方面。这种情况下，一定要注意逻辑结构。
首先第一段要明确告诉读者你要讨论几个部份
...Therefore, there are three aspects of this problen have to
be addressed.
The first questuon involves...
The second problem relates to
The thrid aspect deals with...
上面的例子可以清晰地把观点逐层叙述。
Or, 可以直接用First, Second, Third...Finally,..
当然,Furthermore, in addition等可以用来补充说明。
3) 讨论部份的整体结构
小标题是比较好的方法把要讨论的问题分为几个片段。一般第一个片段指出文章最为重要的数据与结论。补充说明
的部份可以放在最后一个片段。
一定要明白文章的读者会分为多个档次。文章除了本专业的专业人士读懂以外，一定要想办法能让更多的外专业人读懂。所以可以把讨论部份分为两部份，一部份提出观点，另一部份详细介绍过程以及论述的依据。这样专业外的人士可以了解文章的主要观点，比较专业的讨论他可以把它当成黑箱子，而这一 部份本专业人士可以进一步研究。
为了使文章清楚，第一次提出概念时，最好加以个括弧，给出
较为详细的解释。
如果文章用了很多的Abbreviation, 两种方法加以解决
1) 在文章最好加上个Appendix，把所有Abreviation列表
2) 在不同的页面上，不时地给出Abbreciation的含义，用来
提醒读者。
总之，写文章的目的是要让读者读懂，读得清晰，并且采取各种措施方便于读者。一定要注意绝对不能全面否定前人的成果，即使在你看来前人的结论完全不对。这是前人工作最起码的尊重，英文叫做给别人的工作credits.
所以文章不要出现非常negative的评价，比如Their results
are wrong, very questionable, have no commensence, etc.
遇到这类情况，可以婉转地提出：
Their studies may be more reasonable if they had
considered this situation.
Their results could be better convinced if they ...
Or Their conclusion may remain some uncertanties.
讨论部份还包括什么内容?
1. 主要数据特征的总结
2. 主要结论以及与前人观点的对比
3. 本文的不足
第三点，在一般作者看来不可取。事实上给出文章的不足恰恰是保护自己文章的重要手段。如果刻意隐藏文章的漏洞，觉得别人看不出来，是非常不明智的。
所谓不足，包括以下内容:
1. 研究的问题有点片面
讨论时一定要说，
It should be noted that this study has examined only..
We concentrate (focus) on only...
We have to point out that we do not..
Some limitations of this study are...
2. 结论有些不足
The results do not imply,
The results can not be used to determine
be taken as evidence of
Unfortunately, we can not determien this from this data
Our results are lack of ...
但是，在指出这些不足之后，随后一定要再一次加强本文的重要性以及可能采取的手段来解决这些不足，为别人或者自己的下一步研究打下浮笔。
Notwithstading its limitation, this tudy does suggest.. However, these problems culd be solved if we consdier
Despite its preliminary character, this study can clearly indicate..
用中文来说，这一部份是左右逢源。把审稿人想到的问题提前给一个交代，同时表明你已经在思考这些问题，但是由于文章长度，试验进度或者试验手段的制约，暂时不能回答这些问题。但是，这些通过你的一些建议，这些问题在将来的研究中游可能实现。
附：英文投稿信详解
A cover letter is the one you write to the editorial board of the journals when you submit your manuscript.
One cover letter generally should include the following parts:
(1)The correspondence information of the correspondent;
(2)The title of the manuscript, the numbers of tables, figures, charts, plates and so on;
(3)The statement that this manucript has never been partly or wholely published in or submitted to any other journals;
(4)The statement that all authors in the manuscript have agreed to submit it to this journal and it's better to have each one's signature;
(5)The statement that the research in the manuscript has been conducted under the guidance of international ethical standards if the research uses animals as experimental materials;
(7)Suggested reviewers you think that are appropriate for this manuscript;
(8)The statement on the inapropriate reviewers for this manuscript, and it's better to state the reasons in concise words;
(9)Some journals require the authors to briefly introduce his research purposes, methods and results.
The following is one cover letter I wrote with a plate given by the two professors.
Zhang San, Ph D
Environment and Architecture School,
Sichuan University
Mozhiqiao, Ring One Road, Chengdu, Sichuan
The People’s Republic of China
Zip code: 610088
E-mail: abc@yahoo.com.cn
Dear Dr. Richard
I enclose a manuscript entitled The Preparation of the Monokaryon Protoplast and its Regenration in Oyster Mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus), which I submit for possible publication in the Jounal of Biosource Technology. All of the authors agree to the submission of this paper.
The text includes 20 pages, 3 tables, and 2 figures prepared using Microsoft Word Processing 2003 according to the journal's Instructions to Authors. We have provided all required supporting documentation.
We respectfully submit that the following individuals would be suitable peer reviewers based on their expertise in the field:
Li Yu, Microbiological Research Institute, Chinese Acadmey of Agricutlureal Sciences. E-mail: li_yu@yahoo.cn
Zhang Jun, Resources and Environmental Protection School, Sichuan Agricultural University. E-mail: zhangjun@yahoo.cn
Chen Wei, School of Horticulture, China Agricultural University. E-mail: chenwei@yahoo.cn
In recent years, our research group has had some conflicts with Li Haha and Wang Chuachua in Sichuan Institute of Microbiology in project application. We request that these individuals not be consulted.
We thank you for considering this work and look forward to your response. Please direct all correspondence about this manuscript to me (or Dr. Zhang San, e-amil: Zhangsan@yahoo.cn).
Sincerely
Zhang Shan
e-mail: zhangsan@yahoo.com.cn
The following are all the authors in this paper and their signature.
Zhang San XXX
Li Si XXX
Wang Wu XXX
Yang Yu XXX
More examples about how to write a cover letter!
COVER LETTER（投稿信）实用指南
1、 什么是cover letter？
指的是投稿信
2、cover letter的内容主要包括那些？
应该简述所投稿件的核心内容、主要发现和意义，拟投期刊，对稿件处理有无特殊要求等（如“not to review” list）。另外，请附上主要作者的中文姓名、通讯地址、电话、传真和e-mail地址。此外有的杂志要求推荐几位审稿人及其联系方式。以及谁已经阅读过该文（当然是牛人）。
有的杂志要求作者写明你没有一搞多投，此外临床实验要求写明符合伦理学要求等。
3、 如何写cover letter？
各个杂志的具体要求是不一样的，在杂志的guide for authors一般会有要求。如果没有具体的要求，大家可按照通用要求处理。
4、常用模板：
（1）
Cover letter
Dear Mr. **
1. The work described has not been submitted elsewhere for publication, in whole or in part, and all the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed.
2. I have read and have abided by the statement of ethical standards for manuscripts submitted to Neuroscience.
kind regards.
Your sincerely,
通讯作者
（2）
Dear Dr. 主编name:
We submit our manuscript entitled " 文章title" to 杂志名for publication.
接着简单介绍你文章的主要创新点和意义，不易过多，但要突出新意和关键点。
All authors have seen the manuscript and approved to submit to your journal.
Thank you very much for your attention and consideration.
Sincerely yours,
通讯作者
（3）
Dear Dr. 主编name:
We submit our manuscript entitled " 文章title" to 杂志名for publication.
接着简单介绍你文章的主要创新点和意义，不易过多，但要突出新意和关键点。
All authors have seen the manuscript and approved to submit to your journal.
Thank you very much for your attention and consideration.
Sincerely yours,
通讯作者
（4）Dr. ***
Editor-in-Chief, ***
(add address) January 22, 2003
Dear Dr. **,
Enclosed herewith please find 3 copies of a MS by: ‘***. *** and ***’ entitled: “**********”, which we would like to submit for publication in the ‘******'.
Looking forward to your decision,
With kind personal regards,
Sincerely yours,
*****
Professor of ***
（5）
Dear Prof. Gil:
This is a manuscript by**and **entitled “.......”. It is submitted to be considered for publication as a “...” in your journal. This paper is new. Neither the entire paper nor any part of its content has been published or has been accepted elsewhere. It is not being submitted to any other journal.
We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readers of your journal as it ........
Correspondence should be addressed to **at the following address, phone and fax number, and email address:
...
Thanks very much for your attention to our paper.
Sincerely yours,
**
（6）
Date: Sep 15, 2003
Dear Editors:
On behalf of my co-authors, I am submitting the enclosed material “ TITLE ” for possible publication in JOURNAL.
We certify that we have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the appropriateness of the experimental design and method, and the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data.
We have reviewed the final version of the manuscript and approve it for publication. To the best of our knowledge and belief, this manuscript has not been published in whole or in part nor is it being considered for publication elsewhere.
Best Regards.
Yours Sincerely,
NAME,ADRESS,EMAIL,FAX
（7）
Dear Dr Regino Perez-Polo：
Enclosed are a manuscript by su jian, yang kun, chen zhihua．Su jian titled“Hypothermia after Acute Ischemic Stroke
”． It is submitted to be considered for publication as a“review" in your journal．This paper is～?Neither the entire paper nor any part of its content has been published or has been accepted elsewhere ．It is not being submitted to any other journal．
We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readers of your journal.
Correspondence and phone calls about the paper should be directed to Su jian at the following address，phone and fax number，and e-mail address：
Su jian
Institute:,
Adress:
Tel：
Fax:
E-mail：
Thanks very much for your attention to our paper．
Sincerely yours，
Su jian
（8）
Dear Editor,
We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled "GDNF Acutely Modulates Neuronal Excitability and A-type Potassium Channels in Midbrain Dopaminergic Neurons", which we wish to be considered for publication in Nature Neuroscience.
GDNF has long been thought to be a potent neurotrophic factor for the survival of midbrain dopaminergic neurons, which are degenerated in Parkinson’s disease. In this paper, we report an unexpected, acute effect of GDNF on A-type potassium channels, leading to a potentiation of neuronal excitability, in the dopaminergic neurons in culture as well as in adult brain slices. Further, we show that GDNF regulates the K+ channels through a mechanism that involves activation of MAP kinase. Thus, this study has revealed, for the first time, an acute modulation of ion channels by GDNF. Our findings challenge the classic view of GDNF as a long-term survival factor for midbrain dopaminergic neurons, and suggest that the normal function of GDNF is to regulate neuronal excitability, and consequently dopamine release. These results may also have implications in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease.
Due to a direct competition and conflict of interest, we request that Drs. XXX of Harvard Univ., and YY of Yale Univ. not be considered as reviewers. With thanks for your consideration, I am
Sincerely yours,
（9）
Dear **.
We would like to submit the enclosed manuscript entitled " *** ", which we wish to be considered for publication in **journal.
We believe that two aspects of this manuscript will make it interesting to general readers of **journal. First, ***. Second, ***. Further, ***.
Thank you very much your considering our manuscript for potential publication. I'm looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Best wishes.
（10）
To: SOLA Chief Editor
Division of Geoenvironmental Sciences
University of Tsukuba
Tsukuba 305-8572, JAPAN
E-Mail: sola@sakura.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp
Dear Sirs,
I am sending herewith a copy of the manuscript, which I would like to submit to SOLA, the Electronic Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan.
The paper is entitled:
Energy Spectrum Proportional to the Squared Phase Speed of
Rossby Modes in the General Circulation of the Atmosphere
by H. L. Tanaka, Yasushi Watarai, and Takahiro Kanda.
Copy of the Abstract:
In this study, energy spectrum of the large-scale atmospheric motions is examined in the framework of the 3D normal mode decomposition. The horizontal scale of disturbance is measured by the phase speed of a Rossby mode c. According to the analysis result for the barotropic component of the atmosphere, we obtain a characteristic energy spectrum with distinct slopes for the turbulence and wave regimes separated by the spherical Rhines speed. In order to explain the observational finding that the energy spectrum is proportional to c^2, we put forward a hypothesis based on the criterion of Rossby wave breaking such that the local meridional gradient of potential vorticity becomes negative, dq/dy < 0, somewhere in the domain. With a constant m describing a total mass of the atmosphere for unit area, we have shown that the barotropic energy spectrum of the general circulation E can be represented as E=mc^2.
Corresponding Author:
Dr. Hiroshi L. Tanaka
Division of Geoenvironmental Sciences
University of Tsukuba
Tsukuba 305-8572, JAPAN
Tel: +81-29-853-4502
Fax: +81-29-853-6879
E-Mail: tanaka@sakura.cc.tsukuba.ac.jp
I hereby certify that this paper consists of original, unpublished work which is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
Desired Editors in Charge:
Kimoto, Masahide University of Tokyo
Mak, Mankin University of Illinois
Five Potential Reviewers:
Name-1, e-mail address-1
Name-2, e-mail address-2
Name-3, e-mail address-3
Name-4, e-mail address-4
Name-5, e-mail address-5
The original manuscript and figures will be transferred, following the instruction by the Editorial Committee when the paper is accepted. I hope your favorable consideration for publication to SOLA.
Sincerely,
Hiroshi L. Tanaka
更详细的有关总结见附件
稿件来源：科学网博客 整理者：王伟华
原文地址：http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=81613&do=blog&id=229812