论 文写完之后，要严格自查并/或找一位同事评价一下，尽可能确保文章具有很强的科学性和良好的撰写方式，然后就可以投向目标期刊了。此时你应该已经挑选出最 合适的期刊，并已经写出一份有说服力的投稿信给编辑。检查目标期刊的《稿约》，确保遵循了所有要求；如果没有，那就要在投稿前做相应改正以免将来造成延 误。其中包括稿件和所有插图都保存为正确格式和所要求的分辨率。
多数期刊鼓励在线投稿，这通常需要在目标期刊注册一个投稿帐户。这是一个分步过程，通常要求输入全名、单位地址、最高学位和所有作者的详细联系信息(不仅是通讯作者)。注册之后，投稿作者把所有相关文件（包括正文、投稿信、插图文件和补充材料）上传到期刊的网上投稿系统。
一 些期刊规定以邮递方式投稿，要求提交规定数量的论文打印件和含所有文件的光盘。通常每个作者都要签署声明表示同意向杂志投稿并在论文上署名，不过有些杂志 现在也通过电子邮件进行确认。投稿过程中可能需要交纳投稿费，但是大多数情况下出版费都是论文被录用之后才会征收。任何从已发表的文献中转载插图或其他内 容都要获得许可，有时在投稿时杂志社就会要求你提交此类许可证明。若论文被录用，论文的版权就要转让给出版商；有时，在投稿时就要填写一份版权转让表。
投 稿过程有时允许你推荐或排除潜在的论文审稿人。如果没有这个过程，你也可以在投稿信中推荐或排除。期刊编辑会尽力任命独立专家为审稿人，但也知道许多领域 的实验室之间存在激烈竞争。他们很清楚：你尚未公开发表的数据具有敏感性，把它交给直接竞争对手有可能不合适。所以，他们愿意知道谁可能是“友好的”审稿 人，谁可能不那么友好。编辑们几乎肯定不会只任命你推荐的审稿人或排除所有你请求排除的人。他们会用你提供的信息来客观地决定谁应该和不应该审读你的稿 件。
在选择哪些专家可列入“推荐审稿人”时，你应该考虑那些你论文所赞成的研究或观点的作者；比如，若你的工作基于之前发表的一篇文献并发展或确 认了其结果，则该文献的资深作者就是好的候选人。你的参考文献可以帮你找出这些候选人，仔细阅读他们的论文就能知道他们的观点是否与你相符或相反。在理想 状态下，你的研究发现能支持你所推荐的本领域资深研究者所提出的观点。相同领域内的国际合作者也可成为“友好的”审稿人，不过如果你们之前共同发表过论文 可能会被编辑以偏向性理由排除。
确定谁应该被排除出审稿人行列要更为困难。但是，如果你知道有另一实验室在做同样的工作(也许你在最近召开的一次 会议上听过该实验室成员做的报告或张贴的壁报)，就可以请编辑把该实验室的主要研究者排除出审稿人行列。此外，也要请编辑把观点或假设与你相反的研究者排 除在外。
当然，期刊会要求任何审稿人完全客观地评议你的稿件。而且，编辑也会在一定程度上评估你的稿件来判断审稿人的意见是否公正。如果收到的审 稿意见完全相互矛盾(如一个非常正面，另一非常负面)，编辑可能会再找一个审稿人来评议直至对审稿意见满意，这会推迟你投稿的决定意见。归根结底，只要研 究的设计和实施都没有问题，结果有新颖和有趣之处，行文清楚简洁并符合《稿约》，你的论文就有最大的机会能逾越这些障碍并最终被录用。

英文原文：
Submitting your paper: final checks
If you have written your paper, critically self-evaluated it and/or asked a colleague to evaluate it, and believe it to be as scientifically robust and well written as possible, you are ready to submit it to your target journal. You should by now have selected the most appropriate journal for your paper and written a convincing cover letter to the editor. Check that all of the instructions in the target journal’s Guide for Authors are complied with—if any are not, then these should be addressed before the paper is submitted or they could cause delays later on. This includes ensuring that the manuscript and any figure files are saved in the appropriate file format and of the requested resolution.
Most journals encourage online submission, which usually requires registering with the target journal and setting up a submission account. This is a step-by-step procedure in which details such as full names, departmental addresses, highest degrees awarded and full contact information for all authors, not just the corresponding author, are usually requested. Following registration of an account, the submitting author will be able to upload all relevant files, including manuscript file, cover letter, separate figure files and any supplementary material files, to the journal’s online submission system.
Some journals request submission by post, which requires posting the requested number of identical printed copies of the manuscript along with an electronic copy of all files on a CD. Frequently, each author is required to sign a declaration agreeing to the submission to the journal of a paper bearing their name, although some journals now verify this by e-mail. During the submission process, there might be a requirement to pay any submission costs, although publication costs are not usually requested until after a manuscript is accepted. Any figures or other content that are being reproduced or modified from previously published work will require the appropriate permissions, and these are sometimes requested at the time of submission. If a manuscript is accepted, the copyrights to the manuscript will need to be transferred to the publisher; the relevant forms for copyright transfer are sometimes made available during the submission process.
The submission process sometimes allows you to recommend or exclude potential reviewers of your manuscript. If not, it is usually worthwhile doing so in your cover letter. The journal editors will try to appoint independent experts as reviewers, but will also be aware that many fields are intensely competitive among labs. They will also appreciate that your unpublished data needs to be treated sensitively, and that it might not be appropriate to put that in the hands of a competitor working on the same thing. Thus, it will help them to know who might be a ‘friendly’ reviewer and who might be less friendly. The editors will almost certainly not appoint only the reviewers you suggest and exclude all those you ask to be excluded, but they will use the information you provide to make an objective decision about who should and who should not review your paper.
In choosing who to recommend as a potential peer reviewer, you should consider any researchers whose hypotheses and ideas your work supports; for example, if your work builds on previously published work, extending or confirming the findings of that work, then the senior author(s) on such a study would likely be a good candidate reviewer. A look through your reference list will help you to identify such candidates, and reading their papers closely will give you an idea of whether their thoughts are in line with your own, or perhaps opposed to them. Ideally, recommend senior researchers in the field who have propounded ideas that would be supported by the findings of your study. International collaborators in the same field also represent potential ‘friendly’ reviewers, although if you have previously co-published work with those researchers the journal editors might exclude them for potentially being bias.
Working out who to exclude can be more difficult, but if you know that some other lab is working closely on the same thing, perhaps because you have seen researchers from that lab speak or present a poster at a recent meeting, it would be a good idea to ask the editors to exclude the Principle Investigator of that lab as a candidate reviewer. Also ask the editors to exclude researchers whose hypotheses or ideas are known to run counter to those suggested in your manuscript.
Of course, any reviewers that are appointed will be asked to be completely objective in their assessment of your manuscript. Moreover, the editors will also be able to assess your manuscript to some degree and identify if the points raised by the reviewers are fair or not. If completely polarized reports (for example, one very positive and one very negative) are received, the editors may choose to appoint additional reviewers and delay a decision on your manuscript until they are satisfied with the reports they receive. Ultimately, if you have designed and executed your study well, show something novel and interesting, and written a clear and concise manuscript complying with the instructions for authors, you will have maximized your chances of getting over the final hurdle before acceptance.

Dr Daniel McGowan
分子神经学博士