Friday, March 30, 2012


date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 10:50:20 -0400
from: Tanya Sheehan <>
subject: Online Access INFO -- GRL MS# 10871

Dear Dr. Hulme:

Thank you for agreeing to review A. Dai and T. Wigley's manuscript "ENSO
signal in global precipitation fields." All of the manuscript files,
including the graphics, may be accessed as follows:
User Name: GRL10260
Password: MfZAAI (case sensitive, so type as written)

Please let me know if you encounter any difficulties, or have any
questions or comments.

Please submit your comments to me via e-mail by July 13, 1999. I would
appreciate it if you would let me know if you anticipate any delay.

I welcome and will pass on to authors any specific suggestions which
would materially improve the quality of this manuscript. Your comments
will be conveyed anonymously to the authors unless you indicate in your
review that you wish your identity to be made known.

Please recognize that the final decision on a paper is made solely by
the Editor using the expertise of several referees like yourself and
based on the GRL criteria attached to this e-mail message.

The Editors of GRL thank you for your time and counsel.


Tanya Sheehan
Editor's Assistant
(p) 202-777-7376
(f) 202-777-7385

for Elfatih Eltahir
Editor, Hydrology and Climate


ATTACHMENT: TEXT FILE, GRL Categories for Review

GRL Categories for Review

Geophysical Research Letters aims to provide rapid publication of
forefront research that has an immediate impact on the science
community. The journal features articles from a broad range of
geophysical disciplines. We ask your help as a reviewer in evaluating
both scientific content (Categories 1-4) and presentation quality
(A-C) to determine if a submitted manuscript meets GRL standards:

SCIENCE: Scientific quality of a manuscript is fundamental to
publication, and the following Categories 1-4 are meant to aid the
reviewer and Editor.

Science Category 1
The manuscript meets one or more of the following criteria. If the
paper falls into Category 1, please give sufficient reason and detail
as to which of these statements apply.

* Important new science at the forefront of an AGU discipline
* Innovative research with interdisciplinary/broad geophysical
* Instrument or methods paper that introduces new techniques with
important geophysical applications

Science Category 2
The manuscript is potentially Category 1 but significant
clarification/revision is needed. If possible, specify the revisions
that might allow this manuscript to meet Category 1 criteria. For
example, the manuscript presents:

* Some unclear or incomplete scientific reasoning
* Inadequate presentation of data
* An instrument/method where the geophysical application is not obvious

Science Category 3
This paper is publishable in the refereed literature but is unlikely
to become a Category 1 paper because it is:

* A scientifically correct paper, but not obviously a significant
advance in a geophysical field
* A solid paper with little immediate impact on the research of others:
e.g., a routine application of a standard research technique; a new
measurement or laboratory method with limited geophysical application
* A good but basically incremental improvement to existing data sets,
models, or instruments

Science Category 4
This paper is essentially unpublishable in an AGU journal.

* There are major scientific errors in the manuscript
* Essentially the same material has been published or is being
considered for publication elsewhere
* The technique is not useful
* The research area is not representative of an AGU discipline

PRESENTATION: Presentation categories measure the maturity of the
submitted manuscript in terms of language, communication, and GRL

Presentation Category A
Category A manuscripts should meet ALL of the following criteria:

* Abstract is succinct (<150 words), accurate, and comprehensible to
a non-specialist
* Manuscript is generally well written, logically organized, and
adequately illustrated
* Figures and tables are understandable and readable (when sized for
* English usage/grammar is adequate, with few spelling/typographical
errors (please specify any minor corrections)
* Manuscript appears to fit GRL's 4-page limit

Presentation Category B
Potentially a Category A manuscript with suitable revision. Please
give explicit direction as to which sections/features need revision,
extension, or reduction. For example:

* Abstract needs to be rewritten/shortened
* Manuscript is not well written, is not logically organized, or is
inadequately illustrated
* Manuscript needs to be (and can be) shortened
* English usage, grammar, or spelling errors detract from the paper

Presentation Category C
The manuscript cannot readily be revised by the authors to meet the
requirements of Category A without a major re-write.

* Specific ideas cannot be adequately presented within the 4-page GRL
* Organization and illustration of the manuscript make it too difficult
to review fairly
* English usage, grammar, and/or spelling errors are endemic and
require substantial copy-editing before this paper can be reviewed

HIGHLIGHTS: GRL is now highlighting several manuscripts in each issue.
Science Category 1 papers are potential highlights. If you feel that
the manuscript you are reviewing is particularly exciting and deserves
to be highlighted, please include in your review a short note as to its

The Editors of GRL rely on the counsel and recommendations of reviewers
in order to maintain the quality of the journal and to meet GRL�s
specific criteria. Please recognize that the final decision on a
manuscript is made solely by the Editor using the expertise of several
reviewers and based on the above GRL criteria.

No comments:

Post a Comment