我刚投的期刊回复如下审稿意见：
Reviewer #1: This is an interesting paper in which the authors attempted to describe a simple approach for cost-effective method to synthesized <delta>-Na2Si2O5 from RHA as the silicon source. XRD and Raman results confirmed the formation of <delta>-Na2Si2O5. However, for publication major revision should be completed. Especially, these are:
(1) Some grammar errors have been observed in this paper and the English level should be improved
(2) <delta>-Na2Si2O5 is characterized by PXRD, Raman, SEM, EDS, and DTA. However, it is better to provide the TEM or HRTEM images of the products.
(3) From the EDS spectrum of the sample, it is clear that the sample is composed of Na, Si and O. But the ratio of the elements is not provided and the authors should provide it in the manuscript.
(4) In the manuscript, the Ca2+and Mg2+ binding capacities of the synthesized <delta>-Na2Si2O5 were calculated the authors cauclated to be 396 mg/g and 435 mg/g, respectively. I think it is better if the authors could provide the origin experimental datas.
(5) "large surface area and highly porous structure of RHA" is referred to as reasons of the superior Ca2+and Mg2+binding capacities, the speculation should be confirmed by BET results of the <delta>-Na2Si2O5.
To conclude, I suggest the manuscript can be accepted for publication after the above major revision.
   主要该期刊（materials letters)图文要求严格，我补充 了TEM图片就超出了，已表征了XRD RAMAN SEM），我感觉做TEM的意义不大。假如我不做TEM可以吗？我该如何回复编辑呢？
    请问有虫友有revise的回复模板吗？有的话请上传一个，不甚感激。 返回小木虫查看更多