date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 10:50:20 -0400 from: Tanya Sheehan subject: Online Access INFO -- GRL MS# 10871 to: m.hulme@uea.ac.uk 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: http://jupiter.agu.org/grl/GRL/GRL_REVIEW/review/GRL10260/new 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. Sincerely, Tanya Sheehan Editor's Assistant (p) 202-777-7376 (f) 202-777-7385 (e) tsheehan@agu.org 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 application * 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 criteria. 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 GRL) * 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 limit * 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 adequately 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 importance. 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.