Referees' quotes – 2010

Our referees, the Editorial Board Members and ad hoc reviewers, are busy, serious individuals who give selflessly of their precious time to improve manuscripts submitted to Microbial Biotechnology. But, once in a while, their humour (or admiration) gets the better of them. Here are some quotes from reviews provided during 2010, to induce a light-hearted start to 2011. • During the holidays I was the victim of a terrible manuscript. I am still under shock, now I need to regain faith in the scientific world. • The combination of results and discussion sections most likely was chosen by the authors to hide scarcity of the actual results to be presented. • Language: 'The present investigation was, therefore, undertaken to undertake. . .'. • I enjoyed reading this paper. It is wonderful to see that the concept that viruses are catalysts of nutrient cycling and lubricants of the microbial loop also holds for 'odd' (Ed.: bioreactor) systems. • I consider this manuscript as 'unfit for review'. • The inhibition shown in figure 1 seems to be nearly non-existent. • Chemistry of the compound was one of the main topics of the paper at least according to the title, but there were no results shown. • 'x ml' is not a concentration. • Figure 3 was supposed to contain chemical data but instead shows a multiwell plate. • How come that you have 10 mm inhibition zone in your control? • This is a really exciting story, well done! • I am not impressed by this article. Looks more like a biotech company in-house project to check the efficiency of a product than a real scientific or technical issue. • This paper is altogether dispensable. • The paper compares two very different. .. systems and concludes (with little surprise, I guess) that one is better than the other. • Descriptive to the bone. • a real 'lowlight'. .. after going through it I got the feeling that I have miserably lost my time. .. you owe me a beer!!!