Peer review lives, and has sharp teeth and claws. By way of Medical Writing, Editing and Grantsmanship, the Editors of Environmental Microbiology, select their best reviewers comments of the year, of which Eli posts a few -
- The biggest problem with this manuscript, which has nearly sucked the will to live out of me, is the terrible writing style.
- The lack of negative controls. . . . results in the authors being lost in the funhouse. Unfortunately, I do not think they even realize this.
- Well, I did some of the work the authors should have done!
- I suppose that I should be happy that I don't have to spend a lot of time reviewing this dreadful paper; however I am depressed that people are performing such bad science.
- This is a long, but excellent report. I had considered asking for EMSAs, but these will not significantly improve the study. It hurts me a little to have so little criticism of a manuscript.
- Season's Greetings! I apologise for my slow response but a roast goose prevented me from answering emails for a few days.
This paper is desperate. Please reject it completely and then block the author's email ID so they can't use the online system in future.Happy New Year