 |
 |
 |
| 24小時(shí)熱門(mén)版塊排行榜 |
- >論壇更新日志 (3734)
- >考研 (864)
- >導(dǎo)師招生 (727)
- >蟲(chóng)友互識(shí) (232)
- >文獻(xiàn)求助 (106)
- >休閑灌水 (87)
- >碩博家園 (58)
- >招聘信息布告欄 (41)
- >考博 (40)
- >綠色求助(高懸賞) (24)
- >博后之家 (22)
- >論文投稿 (18)
- >基金申請(qǐng) (15)
- >教師之家 (9)
- >攻關(guān)文獻(xiàn)(高獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)) (8)
- >外文書(shū)籍求助 (8)
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 5295 | 回復(fù): 24 | ||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿足指定條件的回帖，點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話題的所有回帖 | ||
心會(huì)笑嗎銅蟲(chóng) (小有名氣)
|
[求助]
這個(gè)審稿結(jié)果修改后錄用的概率有多大？ 已有11人參與
|
|
|
Dear XXX: Your manuscript entitled "XXX" which you submitted to Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Plant Soil Science, has been reviewed. Enclosed please find the reviews of the above manuscript. On the basis of the reviewers' appraisals and my own, your manuscript is conditionally accepted pending revision. Please carefully review all criticisms and suggestions raised by the referees. Please keep in mind that this decision does not guarantee a final acceptance of the work. In your cover letter please provide a point-by-point response to each comment. When I have received your revised manuscript, I will notify you of the status of your manuscript. When you revise your manuscript please highlight the changes you make in the manuscript by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text. Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Plant Soil Science and I look forward to receiving your revision. Sincerely, XXX Referee(s)' Comments to Author: Referee: 1 Comments to the Author 1. Novelty of the paper. I do not see some novelty in the paper. The aim of the paper was to compare infiltration /outflow rates during heavy rainfall under conditions of different treatments, slopes and with and without soil crust. 2. Results obtained by measurements (experiments) in laboratory are correct, they correspond to the known qualitative results of measurements published in literature. 3. Novelty are probably the data for Chinese loess plateau; but they are probably interesting to this region. I am not sure if this type of information (case study) can be published in this Journal. 4. I can repeat, that this study is good made. Formally, it needs a lot of improvements. Language is not good enough, there are presented some trivial information, like definition of infiltration, some terms are not used properly. Substantial language improvement is needed to sanction publication-important 5. Regarding to the influence of slope on the infiltration rate, it can be noted, that it depends on rain rate. At low rate of precipitation, the influence of slope can be negligible, but at high rates it can be significant. The rate of rain used here was extremely high, therefore the slope matters. As many studies already are available on the topic you must highlight the new information-important Referee: 2 Comments to the Author General comments Generally, the innovation degree of the manuscript is medium, since there have been some researches on infiltration under tillage treatments in Loess Plateau of China. And it is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar and sentence structure. 1) I think Fig. 3 is not necessary, since Fig. 2 clearly shows the infiltration rate curve including the steady-state infiltration rate for different tillage treatments under different slope angles, and Table I is not necessary, since Table Ⅱ shows the ponding time from different tillage treatments between the crusted and uncrusted soil surface including all the data in Table I. 2) In Table IV, the positions of Rtc and Rtuc may be opposite. The meanings of IRc-CK and IRuc-CK are not clear, and I think IRc-SS and IRuc-SS are easier to understand. 3) Enlarge description in “treatments” to explain the different treatments more clearly. As far as I understand there’re 24 treatments (2 soil surface conditions by 3 tillage treatments by 4 slope angles), aren’t there? 4) There is a lack of explanation of statistical methods used in the study. You need to provide more descriptions on the paired T-test and the Multivariate analysis. 5) The results should be compared with previous researches, since there have been some relative researches in Loess Plateau of China. 6) The conclusion section was omitted. You need to provide major conclusions from this study in a lonely section. 7) You provided an exhaustive list of references in various place. I recommend you only cite the ones that are most relevant and representative. In addition, the reference formats are not uniform, so you should revise them carefully according to the editor demands. 8) The 9th line: “The results showed that” instead of “Results show that:”? 9) The 28th line: “influencing” rather than “influence”. 10) The 45th line: “Tillage treatments sometimes were discussed as no tillage, mulch farming, stable mulch, minimum tillage and so on in the USA and Australia.” References are needed for the 2 countries listed in this sentence. 11) The 161st line: “Fig. 3” should be revised into “Fig. 4”. Fig. 4 is an example of 5° slope, but its representativeness is not clear and it can’t stand for the other slopes, so the relative conclusion appears unbelievable. 12) The 164th line: “Fig. 4” should be revised into “Fig. 5”. 13) The 166th line: the expression “1.29-1.56 times under CT treatment” and following similar ones are not accurate from mathematical angle. Referee: 3 Comments to the Author 1. The manuscript dealt with the infiltration under tillage treatments and soil crusts in the Loess Plateau of China. One problem is that the authors used the changed soil in their experiment, compared to the undisturbed soil. Sieve could change soil particle composition and grain size distribution; while compressing could destroy the original soil porosity and soil pore structure. All of these will lead to the alterations of soil texture and bulk density, which are closely related to soil permeability. Besides, the soil used in the experiment has been processed into a uniform bulk density, which is impossible in the field environment. 2. Line 24-25: From the references you provided, you cannot draw the conclusion that “soil moisture is the greatest fact or affecting vegetation restoration and ecological environment”. I think the greatest factor is water resources instead of soil moisture. 3. Line 26-27: Please give detailed explanation about the sentence to make it convinced or more accessible. How could infiltration process increase crop yield? 4. Line 32: Is the term “a soil crust” or “soil crust”? Please clarify. 5. Line 34-36: What kind of impact does crust have on the erosion process, positive or negative? It’s better to make it clear. 6. Line 37-39: Rewrite the sentence please. The sentence “Effects of soil crusts on the soil erosion process have been studied for many years” has nothing to do with the hydraulic conductivity. 7. Line 45-46: What do you want to express through the sentence? 8. Line 60-61: After reading through the full manuscript, it’s hard to find the relationship between infiltration and soil and water loss, let alone the prevention of soil and water loss. 9. Line 62-67: “Interaction” is quite different from “combined action”. What have you done in your experiment is the combined action instead of the interaction. 10 Section of Soil Materials (Line 73-82): What have you done on the soil before the experiment could change the soil texture. Why did you select the uniform bulk density? 11. Section of Rainfall simulator(Line 83-91): The authors could use a picture to summarize these sentences. 12. Line 125: “to runoff”? 13. Line 125-130: The section of results and discussion is too simple. What about the situation under the crusted surface? 14. Line 152-153: How to draw this conclusion? Where is the table or fig.? 15. Line 206: The conclusion should come from the comparison of the crusted without tillage treatments and the crusted with tillage treatments. |
回復(fù)此樓» 猜你喜歡
311求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
-
289求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有25人回復(fù)
-
329求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
-
材料考研調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
-
327求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
-
材料科學(xué)與工程調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有18人回復(fù)
-
337求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
-
301求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
275求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
-
292求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有14人回復(fù)
» 本主題相關(guān)價(jià)值貼推薦，對(duì)您同樣有幫助:
- 編輯給的回復(fù)是這樣的，這樣最后接受的幾率大嗎？
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- 請(qǐng)問(wèn)論文外審?fù)ㄟ^(guò)之后錄用概率大嗎？
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
- 收到初審意見(jiàn)了，大家說(shuō)錄用的可能性有多大？
已經(jīng)有13人回復(fù)
- 審稿時(shí)間與接收概率
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
- 通信學(xué)報(bào)審稿費(fèi)是等通知再交嗎？一般審稿時(shí)間是多久啊？錄用幾率有多大？
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- 修改后再審是什么狀態(tài)？？？求助~~~~~
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
- 審稿意見(jiàn)修改影不影響錄用？
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
- 修改后錄用機(jī)會(huì)大嗎
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
- 物理學(xué)報(bào)主編終審階段被退稿的概率有多大
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
- 專家意見(jiàn)是建議錄用，稿件狀態(tài)是修改后終審，這樣的情況錄用的機(jī)會(huì)大嗎？
已經(jīng)有36人回復(fù)
- 審稿人給提了修改很多的修改意見(jiàn)，是不是被拒概率很高？
已經(jīng)有30人回復(fù)
- 這么個(gè)審稿意見(jiàn)，錄用幾率大嗎？
已經(jīng)有20人回復(fù)
- 外審后退修,錄用的可能性有多大?
已經(jīng)有13人回復(fù)
- 《材料科學(xué)與工藝》修改后再審被錄用的概率有多大？
已經(jīng)有19人回復(fù)
- 論文處于編輯加工狀態(tài)，錄用率有多大？
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- Re-submit 的文章幾率有多大？
已經(jīng)有32人回復(fù)
- 審稿意見(jiàn)“修改后錄用”，改得不好的話會(huì)不會(huì)被斃掉
已經(jīng)有48人回復(fù)
- 機(jī)械工程學(xué)報(bào)初審?fù)ㄟ^(guò)，無(wú)修改意見(jiàn)，已送復(fù)審，請(qǐng)問(wèn)錄用幾率多大？
已經(jīng)有30人回復(fù)
- 《電子學(xué)報(bào)》的編委審批狀態(tài)錄用的幾率是多大？
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- 一審的評(píng)審結(jié)果，接收的可能性多大？
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
- 論文修改后由誰(shuí)決定錄用與否
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
- 大家?guī)臀曳治鲆幌耺aterial and design的審稿意見(jiàn)，錄用幾率大不？
已經(jīng)有24人回復(fù)
- 請(qǐng)問(wèn)一下，是不是審稿時(shí)間越長(zhǎng)，被錄用的可能性越大呢？
已經(jīng)有58人回復(fù)
- 投稿AEM，這種審稿結(jié)果，稿件錄用的機(jī)會(huì)有多大？
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
- 請(qǐng)教《物理學(xué)報(bào)》修改后再審的錄用幾率？
已經(jīng)有16人回復(fù)
- 請(qǐng)教《計(jì)算機(jī)應(yīng)用》到了審理三錄用概率有多大
已經(jīng)有24人回復(fù)
yijianmeixyt
鐵桿木蟲(chóng) (著名寫(xiě)手)
一剪梅
- 應(yīng)助: 158 (高中生)
- 金幣: 16506.5
- 散金: 59
- 紅花: 5
- 帖子: 1880
- 在線: 304.6小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 1161506
- 注冊(cè): 2010-12-03
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 機(jī)構(gòu)學(xué)與機(jī)器人
7樓2014-02-28 09:18:11
statsky
木蟲(chóng) (正式寫(xiě)手)
- 應(yīng)助: 35 (小學(xué)生)
- 金幣: 4634.7
- 散金: 2415
- 紅花: 2
- 帖子: 782
- 在線: 627.8小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 417924
- 注冊(cè): 2007-07-02
- 專業(yè): 數(shù)學(xué)
2樓2014-02-28 01:04:13
3樓2014-02-28 05:53:32
oceanlike
木蟲(chóng) (著名寫(xiě)手)
- 應(yīng)助: 214 (大學(xué)生)
- 金幣: 5043.2
- 散金: 419
- 紅花: 15
- 帖子: 2578
- 在線: 435.1小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 619577
- 注冊(cè): 2008-10-07
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 礦山巖體力學(xué)與巖層控制
4樓2014-02-28 06:38:16
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 292求調(diào)劑 +14 | 是妍子也是研子 2026-03-30 | 14/700 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
[考研] 322求調(diào)劑 +5 | 熹僖XX 2026-03-31 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 319求調(diào)劑 +10 | 太容易1018 2026-04-01 | 10/500 |
|
|
|
[考研] 274求調(diào)劑 +8 | 薛定諤的虎。 2026-04-01 | 8/400 |
|
|
[考博] 26年申博 +3 | staryer 2026-03-30 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 285求調(diào)劑 +11 | AZMK 2026-04-01 | 11/550 |
|
|
|
[考研] 284求調(diào)劑 +12 | 小熊～～ 2026-03-31 | 12/600 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿同濟(jì)大學(xué)323分（080500）求調(diào)劑 +4 | yikeniu 2026-04-01 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 318求調(diào)劑 +8 | 七憶77 2026-04-01 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 070300化學(xué)專業(yè)279調(diào)劑 +10 | 哈哈哈^_^ 2026-03-31 | 10/500 |
|
|
|
[考研] 080200學(xué)碩，機(jī)械工程專業(yè)277分，求帶走！ +4 | 瓶子PZ 2026-03-31 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 299求調(diào)劑 +8 | 嗯嗯嗯嗯2 2026-03-27 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600，專業(yè)課化工原理，320分求調(diào)劑 +6 | 大饞小子 2026-03-29 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600材料與化工調(diào)劑 +16 | kikiki7 2026-03-30 | 16/800 |
|
|
|
[考研] 279求調(diào)劑 +12 | j的立方 2026-03-29 | 12/600 |
|
|
|
[考研] 322求調(diào)劑 +10 | 宋明欣 2026-03-27 | 10/500 |
|
|
|
[考研] 332求92調(diào)劑 +8 | 蕉蕉123 2026-03-28 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 本科新能源科學(xué)與工程，一志愿華理能動(dòng)285求調(diào)劑 +3 | AZMK 2026-03-27 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 283求調(diào)劑 +3 | A child 2026-03-28 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 調(diào)劑 +3 | 李嘉圖·S·路 2026-03-27 | 3/150 |
|