请大家帮我看一下，还有必要重投吗？审稿人一个很负面，两个小修吧。副主编负面意见。主编据稿鼓励重投。
主编--------The above-noted manuscript is not suitable for publication in the Canadian Journal of Forest Research in its current form; comments of the Associate Editor and Reviewers are found below.  The review team believes that the manuscript could ultimately make a good contribution, but the changes required are judged to be too substantive to be accommodated within a normal revision process.  We would, however, be interested in eventually publishing a manuscript on this topic and therefore encourage you to make the necessary changes and resubmit the new manuscript to our Journal. We note that the English grammar needs considerable work; if you do not have access to a native English speaker to proofread your manuscript, Canadian Science Publishing recommends the services of editage.com.If you decide to resubmit a manuscript, please include a cover letter and describe how you have addressed the major concerns of the referees and the Associate Editor.  Please find their comments attached.

副主编------Associate Editor Comments to the Author:
The manuscript was seen by three independent reviewers. I am following the opinion of one of them in that the study brings little news, other than the application of established techniques for a confer species that hitherto has not been subjected to somatic embryogenesis - there is little other innovation. Furthermore, the description lacks some important details, and aspects of the interpretation of some of the results are questioned by the other reviewers. This concerns e.g. a possible genotype vs. mother tree effect. I agree it is the mother tree, but with that comes the complication that slight differences in maturity of the seeds may cause this difference - a long-known general effect in forest genetics ('the maternal effect'). Attention to the possible effects of polyembryony is another important hint from one of the reviewers. Additionally, the manuscript is not up to our linguistic standards. 返回小木虫查看更多