of o-rings in high concentration EtPy', but the statement has not been supported by other evidence/literature.
8. Pages 14 through 17: the observed reactivity of various solvents for adsorbed CO on the Pt surface (figs 3 & 4) has to be discussed more precisely. This reviewer is unable to follow the reason why they showed different reactivity, is it principally due to the organic moieties, or due to the impurities of commercially available chemicals or a mixed effect. It has to be clearly demonstrated, however, the only experiment performed with CO/water CCl4 would difficult to describe it in detail.
9. The author try to restrain with repeated arguments in the text ., page 3 para 1: It was generalized that........., also appeared on page 21 first para.
10. Captions of the figures are too long, the detailed description already given in the text, hence would not be included here. Captions should be short and crispy.
=============================================== Dear Editor,
I quite appreciate your favorite consideration and the reviewer’s insightful comments. Now I have revised the JCIS-06-247 exactly according to the reviewer’s comments, and found these comments are very helpful. I hope this revision can make my paper more acceptable. The revisions were
addressed point by point below.
[general] The objective of this research was added at the beginning of the third paragraph of Introduction. How the study is useful for practical purposes was added at the end of Conclusion as one paragraph.
[1] Ambiguous statement ., “much work is still ahead” was deleted.
[2] Ethyl pyruvate was used here as a typical compound (containing two carbonyl groups) to demonstrate the feasibility of using our diagnosing tool to detect low-coverage CO (coming from decarbonylation of EtPy) at the liquid-solid interface. EtPy is a reactant used in liquid-phase chiral catalysis, and slight decomposition of EtPy to adsorbed CO was reported to influence the catalytic performance. In addition, by studying that, we can directly compare our results with previous studies. More details in the first paragraph of Section .
[3] The IR cell was designed according to the IR cells used by many electrochemical workers. References were added. A photo was given in the Supporting Information.
[4] A flow diagram of the experimental setup was given in the new Fig.
1.
[5] The CO adsorption experiments were performed in the same adsorption mode, by bubbling CO through a clean Pt surface in different days to achieve the same saturation coverage of CO. Initial experiments indicated that given the CO bubbling rate was cm3/min, CO can saturate on Pt after 30-45 min. We bubble CO for 60 min to guarantee the same CO coverage. If we bubble CO for more time, or if we increase the CO flowing rate several times, the CO saturation coverage doesn’t change, indicating 60 min is already enough. A figure showing the CO uptake as a function of bubbling time was given in the Supporting Information.
[6] The displacement of EtPy by CCl4 was confirmed by the removing of EtPy peaks. The mention of Fig. 7a and 7b etc. throughout the text were all corrected.
[7] It is known that some solvents such as acetone can corrode the Viton o-ring. We saw the damage of o-ring after using high-concentration EtPy. A reference to the Viton o-ring information was given.
[8] The observed reactivity trend is due to a combination of both effects, with the accumulation of organic moieties on Pt surface during
numerous flushing cycles the more important reason. A few proper sentences were added to clarity this point.
[9] The repeated arguments in the first paragraph in Section were deleted.
[10] The too-long captions were significantly shortened.
In all, I found the reviewer’s comments are quite helpful, and I revised my paper point-by-point. Thank you and the review again for your help!
============================================== 结果：
欢迎浏览：
Organic Chemistry on Solid Surfaces (Review)
Z. Ma, F. Zaera*, Surface Scence Reports 61 (2006) 229-281. ScienceDirect TOP25 Hottest Articles in Chemistry
CI修改稿回答审稿人意见范文模板
修改稿回答审稿人的意见（最重要的部分） List of Responses
Dear Editors and Reviewers:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Paper Title” (ID: 文章稿号). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
Responds to the reviewer’s comments: Reviewer #1:
1. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ××××××
2. Response to comment: (……简要列出意见……) Response: ×××××× 。。。。。。