Manuscript review

The editors thank the authors for their contributions and the referees, the unsung heroes of science, for their diligent and timely manuscript reviews. Last, but certainly not least, we thank Cheryl Shanks of the ACS Books Department, without whose patience, help, and encouragement this volume would not be possible. 

The editors express their appreciation to Giles R. Cokelet of the California Institute of Technology, who has also participated in manuscript review as the assistant editor for this volume to Michel Boudart, for his review of the chapter by J. H. Sinfelt and to the staff of Academic Press, for help in expediting publication. 

This book makes a substantial break with tradition in the matter of organic nomenclature. It was difficult to decide to do this because changes in this area are very hard to achieve, perhaps for the reason that they threaten the viability of what already is published and, indeed, even our customary forms of verbal communication. One of the authors remembers vividly the protests of his thesis supervisor to the idea of acquiescing to the admonition of a manuscript reviewer who felt that crotyl chloride and methylvinylcarbinyl chloride represented just too much of a mixing of nomenclature systems for isomeric compounds. But we ve used those names in nineteen earlier papers Nonetheless, organic chemists and organic chemistry will surely be better off to name these same compounds systematically as l-chloro-2-butene and 3-chloro-l-butene. 

This book was acquired for publication through the efforts of Lawrence A. Casper acting in behalf of the American Chemical Society as a Specialty Editor. Dr. Casper developed the concept for this book and assisted in the content development and manuscript review. 

With these thoughts in mind, the editors of journals published by the American Chemical Society now present a set of ethical guidelines for persons engaged in the publication of chemical research, specifically, for editors, authors, and manuscript reviewers. These guidelines are offered not in the sense that there is any immediate crisis in ethical behavior, but rather from a conviction that the observance of high ethical standards is so vital to the whole scientific enterprise that a definition of those standards should be brought to the attention of all concerned. 

Publishing a manuscript, whether intended for a journal or a book, is a process. It has four stages the draft manuscript, manuscript review, the final manuscript, and processing of accepted manuscripts. Along the way, responsibility for the different stages passes from the author, to the journal or book editor, back to the author, and finally to the technical editor. This chapter provides an overview of each of these stages as they evolve in scientific, technical, and medical (STM) publishing. 

Many reviewers divide their reviews into general comments and specific, detailed comments. In the general section, reviewers should draw attention to both the strong and the weak points of the manuscript, the concepts, the objectives, and the methods. Like an author writing a manuscript, reviewers should write reviews in a comprehensive but concise manner, addressing the questions presented in Box 6-1. 

We are especially grateful to the volume editor, J. I. Drever, and to B. Kimball, USGS, Salt Lake City, for manuscript review. We also wish to thank the following for helpful comments Profs. C. J. Bowser, U. Wise, (ret.), G. M. Ashley, Rutgers U., T. K. Lowenstein, SUNY Binghamton, Drs. E. Callender (ret.) and W. Wood, USGS, Reston, and Dr. Y. Yechieli of the Hydrologic... 

The authors would like to express sincere appreciation to the following individuals for their invaluable comments and suggestions Dr. Steven Vaughn and Dr. Joan Gotthardt (general manuscript review) Dr. Mark Robinson (human food safety) Dr. Margaret Oeller (veterinary pharmaceuticals for minor uses and minor species) and Dr. Richard Ellis (international harmonization efforts). 

The author would like to thank Beth Dove of Lifetree Clinical Research and Pain Clinic for providing technical writing and manuscript review. 

Manuscript processing, stages, 393—396 Manuscript review, 305-351, 393-394 Margins on illustrations, editorial purpose,... 

I start a manuscript review by looking at the table of contents and comparing it with what I know about a subject. This gives me some idea of the completeness of the content. I also look for typos and readability in addition to technical accuracy on the basis of my knowledge of a subject. I usually do not look at tables in detail, but I am a visual person, so I look at figures for understanding. 

A journal editor should expect to have his or her own manuscripts reviewed in accord with the same criteria, but of course this does not always happen. 

I thank Joe Licciardi for unpublished data and Ralf Hetzel and Rainer Wieler for comments on the manuscript. Reviews by Ken Farley, Simon Kelley, William Phillips, and Jorg Schafer were very helpful to better achieve this article s purpose to become a survey of the current state of the art in cosmic ray exposure dating using noble gases. 

As Series Editor I thank Matt, John and John for careful selection of the topics and many authors who contributed to Volume 48 and for their subsequent management of the manuscript review and preparation process. All four of us appreciate the considerable efforts of MSA s Executive Director, Alex Speer, who manages all the Society s many programs, including short courses and publications, so calmly (well, maybe not always) and competently (without exception). 

The author is grateful to P. Cohan for assistance with application review, and to Dr. G. Grethe for helpful discussions regarding scientific ideas and manuscript review. 

Sixth Edition Manuscript Reviewers David Alonso Dan Becker... 

Quantum chemistry has certainly come of age, and quantum chemical concepts appear in nearly all papers published in the chemical literature today. Actual quantum chemical calculations are now reported in many experimental papers, and computer codes that perform these calculations are now often considered as another piece of chemical apparatus. Various experimental groups now train experts in computational chemistry, along with experts in NMR spectroscopy, mass spectroscopy, and so on. Nearly all molecular electronic structure calculations today start with molecular orbital (MO) calculations, but the history of the development of this methodology is often forgotten. Today s heroes have become the writers of useful computer code, but the basic underpinnings of these codes, the ideas that let these codes develop and become useful and those who developed these ideas, are often forgotten. Who is Roothaan What did he do that so influenced MO theory I can make my distinction of theoretical chemist versus computational chemist, should such a distinction be appropriate, on the basis of this answer. This short manuscript reviews the 1951 paper by C.C.J. Roothaan entitled New developments in molecular orbital theory [1], hopefully putting this... 

Manuscript Review Panels Over 50 teachers and academics from across the country and internationally reviewed the various drafts of the manuscript to give feedback on content, pedagogy, and organization. This feedback was summarized by the book team and used to guide the direction of the text. 

The editor and authors are deeply grateful to the symposium sponsors for providing a forum to explore this important subject and to the American Chemical Society Publications Division for pubhshing onr work. We also owe special thanks to the manuscript reviewers, Patrick Barron, Ernest C. Coleman, Wilham Dunkelburg, Kenneth R. Daigis, Rex Lnzader, and Susan Wollowitz who helped us to make this book a more accurate, useful, and readable work. 

There is clearly much room for improvement by authors, manuscript reviewers, and journal editors in ensuring that readers of randomized clinical trial reports are provided with comprehensive descriptions of adverse event data. 

Significant time and effort is required to organize a symposium and publish a proceeding volume. We would like to extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to the symposium organizers, invited speakers, session chairs, presenters, manuscript reviewers, and conference attendees for their enthusiastic participation and contributions. Finally, credit also goes to the dedicated, tireless, and courteous staff at The American Ceramic Society for making this symposium a huge success. 

---