【正文】 數(shù)有經(jīng)驗(yàn)的編輯都認(rèn)為：不認(rèn)真準(zhǔn)備的稿件絕不是高水平科學(xué)研究成果的良好載體(A poorly prepared manuscript is，almost without fail，the carrier vehicle of poor science. Day AR.)。用現(xiàn)在時(shí)敘述已知或被證明的事實(shí)，用過去時(shí)描述本研究結(jié)果。Conclusion中不要包含body以外的information，保持brief、neat和concise，一定要舍得結(jié)束自己的paper；如果自己的paper只是project的一部分，稍做說明。Abstracts是paper的一個(gè)縮寫(miniature of whole paper)，一定要簡(jiǎn)明扼要(less than 200 words,one paragraph)，按照paper的順序介紹主要研究對(duì)象(subject)、實(shí)驗(yàn)設(shè)計(jì)(design)、實(shí)驗(yàn)步驟(procedures)以及最后結(jié)果(results)，這種介紹必須讓非專業(yè)的人員一般來說，大多數(shù)情況下是過去時(shí)態(tài)，在Introduction文獻(xiàn)回顧，Methods整個(gè)部分，Results結(jié)果總結(jié)，Discussion中的大部分，都用過去時(shí)態(tài)陳述。不同雜志對(duì)參考文獻(xiàn)格式要求不一樣，具體下來有所區(qū)別的可以分為：作者的寫法，有的是簡(jiǎn)寫在前，有的簡(jiǎn)寫在后，有的簡(jiǎn)寫有點(diǎn)，有的簡(jiǎn)寫沒有點(diǎn)；文章的名字，有的要加上引號(hào)，有的沒有引號(hào)；期刊的寫法，有的要簡(jiǎn)寫，有的要全稱，有的要斜體，有的則不需要；年和期卷號(hào)的順序，有的是年在前，有的是年在后；期刊論文、書、學(xué)位論文、會(huì)議論文，四種引用的格式各不相同；文獻(xiàn)的排列順序，有的是按照字母的順序，有的則是按照在論文中出現(xiàn)的順序用阿拉伯?dāng)?shù)字排序。所以Discussion的文字描述和語(yǔ)言表達(dá)的精確性尤為重要。選擇的問題有時(shí)不只一個(gè)(多數(shù)情況是2個(gè)以上)，因此要按一定層次描述清楚。要寫好Discussion，大概可以分為下面兩個(gè)步驟：A.個(gè)。.描述時(shí)要有鮮明的層次感，對(duì)每個(gè)步驟之間的順序和關(guān)聯(lián)要描述清楚，不要造成實(shí)驗(yàn)過程混亂不堪的印象，因?yàn)樵u(píng)審人最終判斷你的實(shí)驗(yàn)是否合理，是從這個(gè)過程描述得來的。實(shí)驗(yàn)材料，不同學(xué)科有不同要求。A.總結(jié)性描述論文的研究?jī)?nèi)容，可以分為一二三四等幾個(gè)方面來描述，為Introduction做最后的收尾工作。分析過去研究的局限性并闡明自己研究的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)。要盡量簡(jiǎn)潔明了，不羅嗦；須知看文章者都是該領(lǐng)域的專家，所以一些顯而易見的知識(shí)要用概括性的而不是敘述性的語(yǔ)言來描述。1. Introduction：所以可以把討論部份分為兩部份，一部份提出觀點(diǎn)，另一部份詳細(xì)介紹過程以及論述的依據(jù)。比如，敘述有時(shí)間順序的事件或文獻(xiàn)，最早的文獻(xiàn)可用AA advocated it for the first BB further demonstrated that.四、關(guān)于論文的總體審查意見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 wellwritten 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 municate 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?文章稿號(hào)), since the copyright agreement for publication has been sent to you two months ago. I am just wondering that how long I can receive the proof of our manuscript from you?I would be greatly appreciated if you could spend some of your time for a reply. I am very pleased to hear from you very much for your sincerely,Corresponding author:Name: Email: 七、文章校稿信件Dear Mr. :Thanks very much for your kind letter about the proof of our paper titled “Paper Title” (ID:文章稿號(hào)) for publication in “Journal Name”. We have finished the proof reading and checking carefully, and some corrections about the proof and the answers to the queries are provided below. Corrections:1. In ****** should be **** (Page ***, Right column, line***)2. In **** the “*****” should be “****” (Page ****, Right column, line****)Answers for “author queries”:1. *********************.2. **********************3. **********************We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us you and best sincerely,Corresponding author:Name: Email: 文章稿號(hào)).We have studied reviewer’s ments carefully and have made revision which marked in red in the paper. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the ments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for ments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you and best sincerely,Corresponding author:Name: Email: 四、修改稿回答審稿人的意見（最重要的部分）List of ResponsesDear Editors and Reviewers:Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ ments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Ti