1. 之前未在论文中提出的新结果或数据。

SCI论文的讨论部分，是给予已经给出的实验数据和结果讨论，因此如果你投稿的期刊是结果和讨论分开的，那么一定要在结果部分给出全部的实验数据和结果，然后再在讨论部分详细解释等。

2. 无端的猜测。

讨论部分，可以引用文献，做合理的推理，但是这一切都是给予自己的实验事实，而不是天马行空的猜测，这样的猜测活性可以在结论部分的最后展望中使用，但是不要在讨论部分中使用。

3. 数据不支持结论。

除非你是为了用你的实验结果数据来否定某个结论，不然最好避免讨论超这种与你实验相反的结论。当然如果你是为了对比，然后有详细的解释（基于你实验数据的解释）为什么你的结论与以往文献不一样。

上面我们说了讨论部分千万不能出现的内容，接下来分享我们应该如何讨论实验中的-意外的实验结果。

我们所谓的意外是指和我们的预期不符，或者和文献结果/常识不一样（不是实验做错了哦）。而且我们也是反复确认了实验是没有问题的。

对于与或者和文献结果/常识矛盾的实验结果，我们可以从自己具体的实验条件来予以解释。

1. 与自己的预期/假设/不一致。

Surprisingly, diglymewith higher binding energy of Li+ than that of DME is expected[31], in principle,to cause stronger solvation of K+ and a higher increase of functional degreethan DME. Nevertheless, thereaction in diglyme displayed a very low degree of functionalization(ΔID/IG(diglyme) = 0.03 and 0.06 for GA and GF, respectively) similar to thepoor solvent DMF. This result suggests another crucial factor(s)that resulted of greater impact in the reactivity of graphenide. A very recent report showed that thedestabilization and flocculation of the graphenide polyelectrolyte in solutioncan be introduced by high effective ionic concentration because of addition ofa large amount of the cation complexing agent 18-crown-6 ether [16]. In our case, diglyme acts as solvent, as well as asimilar role of 18-crown-6 ether with strong solvation of K+, leading todestabilization and subsequently flocculation… 2D Mater. 20196 025009

红色的字体内容在说明作者原来的假设（in principle），但是中间出现了意外情况（surprisingly）。然后蓝色字体部分是作者试验所发现的实际情况，与其原来的假设是矛盾的。因此作者必须解释说明为什么会出现这样的意外结果，其是否影响自己的整体结论或者假设，作者在黑色粗体部分引出另一个因素来解释意外。为此，本文作者在绿色字体部分首先引用文献（avery recent report showed…）来说明自己的“意外情况”的背景和论据，然后说明自己体系中存在类似的现象（in our case, … as well as a similar role…）

2. 与常识矛盾。

The combination of two negatively charged radical anions (C60^•− and O2^•−) may seem unreasonable at the first sight; however, it is noteworthy that theunit negative charge on C60 is actually delocalized over the whole surface dueto the π-conjugation of the molecule, where eachindividual carbon atom carries only 1/60 of the unit negative charge due to theπ-conjugation of the molecule, whichmay greatly decrease the repulsion between the two negatively charged species.J. Org. Chem. 2012, 77, 2553−2558

红色的字体内容在说明实验机理是两个负电荷的物种结合似乎违背的常识（may seem unreasonable at the first sight），为此作者必须为这个机理提供正面的说明和解释。所以作者在蓝色字体部分(negative charge on C60 is actually delocalizedover the whole surface…)从自己实验试剂的具体情况出发，解释了由于共轭的作用，使得每个碳原子的负电荷只有1/60。最后本文作者在绿色字体部分(may greatly decrease the repulsion)再次说明因为电荷的排斥减小而合理化其反应机理。

3. 与文献结果不一致。

These results show a different release profile than thosereported in the literature. Kavitha et al. observed a faster CPT releasemechanism at acidic pH (acetate buffer, pH 5.0−5.5) than at neutral pH (PBS buffer, pH 7.4).64,65 This effect was attributed to theincreased hydrophilicity and higher solubility of CPT at lower pH. The authorssuggested that, at low pH, the nitrogen in CPT is protonated, and thehydrophobic interactions between the drug and the functionalized GO arereduced, which increases the CPT solubility in the dispersion medium. However, these authors did not mention the use ofsurfactants in the receptor medium (sink condition); in addition, GO was functionalized with polymers, which may be one of the reasons for the different CPT release profile. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2018, 1, 922−932

红色的字体内容在说明作者的实验结果和文献是矛盾的（These results show a different release profilethan those reported in the literature），为此作者必合理解释自己的实验结果。所以作者在蓝色字体部分（these authorsdid not mention… in addition, GO was functionalized with polymers…）从自己的具体实验条件出发，对比了和文献的不同指出，合理解释了自己实验结果和文献不同的原因。