大家帮忙分析一下

　　大家帮忙分析一下。第一次SCI，就遭到修改后重新的打击。审稿人提出下列意见。没看太明白。请大家帮忙分析。
Dear Authors,

The proposed methodology may lays a foundation in synthesising pyrazolo-pyrimidine derivatives which were acknowledged among the important biologically active compounds. To further improve this works, it is suggested to:

1) Differentiate between the proposed and available methods and highlight how the proposed works can bridge the limitation of current research.

2) Provide the relevency of the choosen alkoxy and aromatic system.

3) Extend the research framework and show the versatility of the proposed methods and its tolerancy towards different funcionalities.

4) Design the research by not varying the substituents which posses similar trend.

The strength of this report is due to its potential as convenience methodology albeit need to further establish the proof-of-concept.

On the positive notes, the report was written in adequate manners with support from relevance literatures, using acceptable scientific language, the postulated reaction mechanism were cleary explained and the compounds were characterized accordingly.

All the best
===有问必答===
最好提出哪些没看明白的，这样岂不是让别人全替你回答？
----
1，没有说明自己的亮点
2，证明和解释自己的理论
3，用科学的论文语言，润色
----
按照人家提的意见认改,重投是在cover letter中说明做了哪些修改,接收的概率还是挺大的,楼主好运
----
觉得是很中肯的意见不是拒稿那种，好好改一下，会用的
----
祝福

6楼2013-12-01 06:33:51
----
算不上什么打击，没有那么顺利的，按意见认改，主要是创新点、论述以及语言表达方面。