Dear Editor，
We are truly grateful to yours and other reviewers’ critical comments and thoughtful suggestions on our manuscript(********). Bad on the comments and suggestions, we have made careful modifications on the original manuscript. All changes made to the text are in red color.最难忘的一次流泪 We hope the new manuscript will meet your magazine’s standard.非分之想 居里夫人名言Below you will find our point-by-point respons to the reviewers’ comments/ questions.
We hope that the revisions are satisfactory and that the revid version will be acceptable for publication in *********.
Thank you very much for your work concerning our paper.
Wish you all the best!
Sincerely yours,
************************
Respon letter写法
We are truly grateful to the reviewers’ suggestions on English. Bad on the
comments, we have made careful modifications on the manuscript.太上老君师傅是谁
林茜Dear Editor:
We are truly grateful to yours and other reviewers’ critical comments and thoughtful suggestions. Bad on the comments and suggestions, we have made careful modifications on the original manuscript. All changes made to the text are in red color. In addition, we have consulted native English speakers for paper revision before the submission this time. We hope the new manuscript will meet your magazine’s standard. Below you will find our point-by-point respons to the reviewers’ comments/ questions:
1
2
3
4
...
Yours sincerely
******
Dear Prof.****:
Thank you very much for your kindly comments on our manuscript (No******). Bad on your and reviewer’s suggestions, we carefully revid the manuscript.
落雁沙We are now nding the revid article for your re-consideration to publish in Journal of Plant Physiology. Plea e our point to point respons to all your comments below, and the corresponding revisions in the body of manuscript, both marked in blue. We look forward to hearing form you soon for a favorable 8 decision.
Thank you again for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
****
1. *****
2.*****
3.*****
Below, the original comments are in black, and our respons are in blue.
****
Following typographical and grammatical errors in original manuscript have been removed and corrected:
(1) Line 20 page 1 in the original manuscript: the drag…..
Revid in the revid manuscript: The drag……
RESPONSES TO REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS
Dear Dr:
We are truly grateful to yours and other reviewers’ critical comments and thoughtful suggestions. Bad on the comments and suggestions, we have made careful modifications on the original manuscript. All changes made to the text are in red color. In addition, we have consulted native English speakers for paper revision before the submission this time. We hope the new manuscript will meet your magazine’s standard. Below you will find our point-by-point respons to the reviewers’ comments/ questions:
Comments from the Editor-in-Chief:
回复后1月，要求小休，并认为英文水平已经大大提高，要求明确我下一步想如何研究，因此老外由帮我写了回复信，如下是第二封信的开场白：
Dear Dr. Chernick:
We must thank you and all other reviewers for the critical feedback. We feel lucky that our manuscript went to the reviewers as the valuable comments from them not only helped us with the improvement of our manuscript, but suggested some neat ideas for future studies. Plea do forward our heartfelt thanks to the experts.
Bad on the comments we received, careful modifications have been made to the R1 manuscript. All changes were marked in red text. In addition, we also have a native English speakers double-checked the English for the revid R2 version. We hope the new manuscript will meet your magazine’s standard. Below you will find our point-by-point respons to the reviewers’ comments/ questions:
Dear Editor:
Thank you very much for your supervision of the reviewing process of my manuscript (Ref. No. of XXXXXXX). We also highly appreciate the reviewer’s carefulness, conscientious, and the broad knowledge on the relevant rearch fields, since they have given me a number of beneficial suggestions. According to the reviewer’s instructions, we have made the following revisions on this manuscript:
1. After examining the reviewer’s comments carefully, we must admit that we have
not expresd our meaning correctly in the previous manuscript. Sorry for this confusion. In the revid version, the “rougher” has been corrected as “weaker and
broader”. (See Line 7 from top, 3.1 Pha identification).
2. As suggested by the reviewer, Fig. 3a has been referred into the revid manuscript
to reveal flattening of the milled powders. (See Line 4 from top, 3.2 Microstructure)u
