Never been published in any other journals
7




We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readers of your journal as it .... Correspondence should be addressed to Shengli Ren at the following address, phone and fax number, and email address: … … Thank you very much for your attention to our paper. Sincerely yours, Shengli Ren (签名) Ronald Rousseau (签名)
10
Follow-up Correspondence
If
you do not receive acknowledgment within 2 weeks, call or write the editorial office to verify that your manuscript was indeed received.

5
(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; (6)Suggested reviewers you think that are appropriate for this manuscript; (7)The statement on the inappropriate reviewers for this manuscript, and it's better to state the reasons in concise words; (8)Some journals require the authors to briefly introduce his research purposes, methods and results.

2.How to write a cover letter
keep
it concise and clear and give prominence to the key points. Your cover letter should be prepared less than one page.
COVER LETTER
组 员：赵 军 郑 猛 胡中元 徐鹏飞 韦振菁
Main contents
Cover letter Follow-up Correspondence（催稿信） Revised Manuscript (稿件退修)
2
1.The importance of a cover letter
(1) An outstanding cover letter can give the editor an excellent impression. It can be used as a prologue (or an opening remark). (2) The cover letter is typically the initial communication which you have with the editor about your manuscript .Then, based on the letter and the abstract of the manuscript, the editor will decide if the article is worth sending to peers for scientific reviewing. (3) For the cover letter can be seen as the abstract of your article, it can partly represent your writing standard. 3
12
When
you receive a modify letter, examine it and the accompanying reviewers’ comments carefully. If the reviewers are right, you should follow their directions and rewrite the manuscript accordingly. If the reviewers and the editor seriously misread or misunderstood your manuscript, you may explain it reasonably and logically.
(7) Demands or expectations. (8) Opinions of your family, friends, or writing teachers. (9) A list of prior rejections. (10) Don’t forget to check grammar and spelling.


Dear Editor: This is a manuscript entitled “International visibility of Chinese scientific journals” by Shengli Ren and Ronald Rousseau. It is submitted to be considered for publication asof all“Article” in Statement an your journal. authors All authors have read and approved this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. 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.
13
Revised Manuscript



Dear editor: Thanks a lot for having reviewed our manuscript. Now we have revised the manuscript according to the reviewers’ comments. Most of the revisions are in the manuscript. Some explanations regarding the revisions of our manuscript are as follows. Dear Prof. XXXX, Thank you very much for your letter and the comments from the referees about our paper submitted to XXXX (MS Number XXXX).We have checked the manuscript and revised it according to the comments. We submit here the revised manuscript as well as a list of changes.If you have any question about this paper, please don’t hesitate to let me know. Sincerely yours,
11

Dear editor, After the submission of our manuscript entitled "Cancer classification by expression profiles: microRNA versus mRNA" (tracking number: 2007-10-11332) to Nature, six weeks have passed. So I would like to inquire the status of our manuscript. We think that our comments on the original paper of Nature will cause widespread interest to both experts and non-experts. This is because microRNA is a hot spot in life science; the author of the original paper is a VIP in cancer research based on gene expression profiles, with a SCI H index of 45, total citations more than 15,000 times, and this paper citied 365 times; and the algorithm we proposed outperforms the recent state-of-the-art algorithm. Moreover, by using other state-of-theart algorithms, we can also prove that the original author's main conclusions are wrong. I am looking forward to your reply. Thanks a lot.