收藏|只需十步轻松搞定审稿人
生信干货
montreal ·2020年9月23日 18:26
最近有一篇文章在网上广为流传，题目叫做：How to Write a Response to Reviewers in Ten Easy Steps【1】。听起来是不是有点像plos computational biology所搞的ten simple rules的活动（那里正好有一篇类似的文章在17年发表【2】）？其实，这里要说的“回复审稿人的十大简单步骤”，来自Richard Lenski所写的一篇博客。Lenski的鼎鼎大名对于不少人来说想必都耳熟能详。这位来自密歇根州立大学（Michigan State University）的生物学教授当年凭横跨30年之久的大肠杆菌5万代的进化实验极大冲击了人们对于微生物进化的认识，也一举奠定了自己的江湖地位【3】。Lenski在这篇博文中一上来就提到主要针对年轻的科研工作者，所谓ECR（early career researcher），且可能对手稿收到整体正面评价但仍需要revision的情况最为适用。让我们逐条看看（限主要部分，全文请参考文末链接）。Lenski：Copy all of the reviewers’ comments into a new documentLenski：Write a short note of thanks to the reviewers and the editor at the top, above all of their comments.翻译：在这个回复文件的最开头，先来一句感谢审稿人和编辑。小编：第二条突然有些不对路，我好像是每条都thank一下，会不会过分殷勤了？Lenski：Use a different font (bold or color) for your responses, to make them easy for the editor (and reviewers, if the paper is returned to them for re-review) to find.翻译：你的回复要用和审稿人不同的字体（粗体或不同颜色皆可），以便编辑和审稿人看清楚。小编：请注意，不建议用红色。有一次审别人的回复信，作者用红色加粗字体写了一大堆，看得我头晕目眩。Lenski：Draft a quick response to each comment.Lenski：Reviewers often begin by providing a synopsis of your paper. Thank the reviewers (again, after the synopsis) for their summary and kind remarks, when appropriate. There’s no need to write anything more after the synopsis, unless there’s a substantive misunderstanding of an important point that comes up again in a later comment. In that case, you might say something like “Thank you for this summary of my/our paper. However, you may have misunderstood one point, about such and such, that I/we address in response to your comment below.”翻译：审稿人通常先写下一段对你的文章的概括性质的话。只要有可能，在这段话后面要表达对审稿人的总结和对文章的细心点评。当然，没有必要在这里废更多的话，除非该审稿人对你的文章的重要的point有所误解且在之后提及。这种情况下，可以试着说巴拉巴拉（见上面原文）。Lenski：Try to view every comment as constructive.翻译：对审稿人所提的每一条建议，都尽量认为是建设性的。小编：为什么我的心态是完全相反呢？在我眼中，全是destructive comments。大牛心态真的好。Lenski：Pay special attention to comments where two (or more) reviewers comment on the same issue.Lenski：Once you’ve got a draft response, share it with your co-authors (if any) to see whether they are on board with your resonses or have other suggestions.翻译：在你的回复信的草稿阶段就和其他作者们一起分享讨论，倾听他们的建议。Lenski：You’ll probably find that some text is trickier to edit than you thought in your draft response. For example, new sentences to address a reviewer’s concern might disrupt the existing flow. That’s the scholarly life: careful working and reworking are needed at every stage.翻译：你很可能发现对于回复信草稿中有些地方的修改是棘手的。譬如，增添新的句子去解释审稿人的疑虑，但这样做可能破坏文章的流畅。然而这就是学术生活：一次又一次的认真的操作对任何阶段都是必不可少的。Lenski：When appropriate, add page numbers (from the revised paper).翻译：只要可以，在回复信中标清楚在revised manuscript中相应的页码。Lenski：Bonus advice! Check out the journal’s instructions for authors.到目前，Lenski的进化实验已经达到第73500代大肠杆菌，而若不是新冠疫情的影响，这一次数字本应更高【4】。小编当年也专程听过Lenski的演讲，平时很少坐满的报告厅里人满为患，可见其受欢迎程度。尽管名声在外，Lenski的实验也受到了一些质疑【5】，感兴趣的朋友请查阅相关引文，这里不再赘述。1.Lenski, How to Write a Response to Reviewers in Ten Easy Steps (2020) https://telliamedrevisited.wordpress.com/2020/07/15/how-to-write-a-response-to-reviewers-in-ten-easy-steps/2.Noble, William Stafford. "Ten simple rules for writing a response to reviewers." (2017) plos computational biology: e1005730.3.Blount, Zachary D., Christina Z. Borland, and Richard E. Lenski. "Historical contingency and the evolution of a key innovation in an experimental population of Escherichia coli." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105.23 (2008): 7899-7906.4.Wikipedia contributors. "E. coli long-term evolution experiment." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 6 Aug. 2020. Web. 24 Sep. 2020.5.Van Hofwegen, Dustin J., Carolyn J. Hovde, and Scott A. Minnich. "Rapid evolution of citrate utilization by Escherichia coli by direct selection requires citT and dctA." Journal of bacteriology 198.7 (2016): 1022-1034.
