AGU旗下比较新的一个杂志，不是很知名，环境方向的，现在返回意见substantial revisions：超大修，真是很绝望啊。
两个审稿人都是给的大修，意见超多……评价比较负面，编辑只给了两周修改，这种情况怎么办呀，还有必要改吗……
编辑的decision letter：
I have received 2 reviews of your manuscript, which are included below and/or attached. As you can see, the reviews indicate that substantial revisions are needed before your paper can be accepted. I am therefore returning the paper to you so that you can make the necessary changes.

附部分评价：
Recommendation: Return to author for major revisions
Significant (Required): There are major errors or gaps in the paper but it could still become significant with major changes, revisions, and/or additional data.
Supported (Required): Mostly yes, but some further information and/or data are needed.
Referencing (Required): Yes
Quality (Required): The organization of the manuscript and presentation of the data and results need some improvement.
Data (Required): Yes
Accurate Key Points (Required): Yes

Recommendation: Return to author for major revisions
Significant (Required): The paper has some unclear or incomplete reasoning but will likely be a significant contribution with revision and clarification.
Supported (Required): Mostly yes, but some further information and/or data are needed.
Referencing (Required): Mostly yes, but some additions are necessary.
Quality (Required): The organization of the manuscript and presentation of the data and results need some improvement.
Data (Required): Yes
Accurate Key Points (Required): Yes 返回小木虫查看更多