| ²é¿´: 2761 | »Ø¸´: 25 | ||||
| µ±Ç°Ö÷ÌâÒѾ´æµµ¡£ | ||||
ljl1205ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
|
[½»Á÷]
´ó¼Ò°ÑÊÕµ½µÄÉó¸åÒâ¼û¶¼·¢ÉÏÀ´°É
|
|||
´ó¼Ò°ÑÊÕµ½µÄÉó¸åÒâ¼û¶¼·¢ÉÏÀ´°É£¬É¹É¹¿´¿´Éó¸åÈËµÄÆÀ¼Û£¬ÓÐûÓÐ×îºÃµÄÆÀÓÈð³µÈÕ°ÑöÒ»ÏÂ![]() ![]() |
» ÊÕ¼±¾ÌûµÄÌÔÌûר¼ÍƼö
ÂÛÎÄͶ¸å |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
366Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
²ÄÁϹ¤³Ì085601£¬270Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ37È˻ظ´
279ѧ˶ʳƷרҵÇóµ÷¼ÁԺУ
ÒѾÓÐ18È˻ظ´
290µ÷¼ÁÉúÎï0860
ÒѾÓÐ31È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸085802 323·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
277Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ23È˻ظ´
322Çóµ÷¼Á£¬08¹¤¿Æ
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
²ÄÁϹ¤³Ì281»¹Óе÷¼Á»ú»áÂð
ÒѾÓÐ30È˻ظ´
»¯Ñ§070300 Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ16È˻ظ´
»¯¹¤Ñ§Ë¶294·Ö£¬Çóµ¼Ê¦ÊÕÁô
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
ljl1205
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 12 (СѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.118
- ½ð±Ò: 3602.5
- É¢½ð: 2948
- ºì»¨: 22
- Ìû×Ó: 1305
- ÔÚÏß: 1822.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 353140
- ×¢²á: 2007-04-23
- רҵ: ¿ØÖÆÀíÂÛÓë·½·¨
2Â¥2009-09-09 21:47:42
goodtimega
Ìú¸Ëľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 1 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 8138.7
- É¢½ð: 570
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 1489
- ÔÚÏß: 527.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 820248
- ×¢²á: 2009-08-02
- רҵ: ¸ß·Ö×Ó²ÄÁϽṹÓëÐÔÄÜ
3Â¥2009-09-09 21:58:28
bjlumang
Ìú¸Ëľ³æ (ÖªÃû×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 25 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 9225.9
- É¢½ð: 56
- ºì»¨: 14
- Ìû×Ó: 7788
- ÔÚÏß: 640.1Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 149938
- ×¢²á: 2005-12-29
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: »¯¹¤ÈÈÁ¦Ñ§ºÍ»ù´¡Êý¾Ý
|
COMMENTS FROM EDITORS AND REVIEWERS Reviewer #1: It is a well written paper with a clear objective and well designed experiments. The findings are a relevant contribution in the field of engineered bioremediation. However, a few minor issues should be addressed: Reviewer #2: This is a good work to combine the bioslurry and two-liquid-phase systems in order to biological degrade persistant contaminants. It contains a variety of chemical and biochemical analysis in order to evaluate the performance of system. However, as I read the manuscript, I theink it need a minor revision about following comments: |
4Â¥2009-09-09 22:18:43
|
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [ Last edited by dd2006425 on 2009-9-11 at 12:36 ] |
5Â¥2009-09-09 22:23:14
wangwei2008
ľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
Сľ³æÖ®ÒÆ»¨¹¬Ö÷
- Ó¦Öú: 6 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 4264.6
- É¢½ð: 1
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 4265
- ÔÚÏß: 152.7Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 495631
- ×¢²á: 2008-01-15
- רҵ: Ö²ÎïÉúÀíÓëÉú»¯
¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï ¡ï
ljl1205(½ð±Ò+5,VIP+0): 9-9 22:31
ljl1205(½ð±Ò+5,VIP+0): 9-9 22:31
|
Reviewer #2: This paper reported the isolation and preliminary characterization of a *****that showed ******************.While the**are of value both as *********for improvement of ***************and as potential new *, there are some major concerns about the completeness and quality of the experiment, as well as the organization and English of the paper. 1. The introduction is very detailed on somaclonal variation, some of them are not necessary. For example,Paragraph 3 and 4 can be replaced by citing two or three relevant review papers 2. There are a number of publications documenting the genetic basis of ***************and more recently, the cloning of these genes, they should be part of the introduction and discussed against the result of this study in the Discussion. The lack of any genetic characterization of the induced resistance is the major shortfall of this research. If there is any data, it would be very helpful. 3. The yield performance of Tables 1, 2, 3 might be presented in a single figure, while other data, for example, *****might be given in the context (since more comprehensive data are given in table 4). *******with stdev would be sufficient for the Table 3. 4. For table 4, the presentation of data for************ is different from mutants, the actual meaning should be explained. 5. In the Discussion, the last sentence of Paragraph 1 seems to be contradictory to the numerious successful examples given in Paragraph 2. 6. Also in the Discussion, Paragraph 4, it stated that "************************************** . This is indeed not true; the frequency is already extremely high to have*********from *considering no screening was done during**********. Therefore, the reasons for such a high ******** frequency should be discussed. Additionally, the possible underlining mechanism of the non-segregation**and ***** such as maturity and plant ******** which is extremely unusual, should be discussed. 7. Also in the Discussion, Paragraph 5 seems not very relevant and can be deleted. 8. Overall, the English needs a thorough revsion. |
6Â¥2009-09-09 22:23:26
nono2009
³¬¼¶°æÖ÷ (ÎÄѧ̩¶·)
No gains, no pains.
-

ר¼Ò¾Ñé: +21105 - SEPI: 10
- Ó¦Öú: 28684 (Ժʿ)
- ¹ó±ö: 513.911
- ½ð±Ò: 2555230
- É¢½ð: 27828
- ºì»¨: 2148
- ɳ·¢: 66666
- Ìû×Ó: 1602255
- ÔÚÏß: 65200.9Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 827383
- ×¢²á: 2009-08-13
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¹¤³ÌÈÈÎïÀíÓëÄÜÔ´ÀûÓÃ
- ¹ÜϽ: ¿ÆÑмҳﱸίԱ»á
7Â¥2009-09-09 22:24:22
wyfwywyf
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 3 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 5726.1
- É¢½ð: 2045
- ºì»¨: 7
- ɳ·¢: 2
- Ìû×Ó: 1405
- ÔÚÏß: 85.8Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 689578
- ×¢²á: 2009-01-07
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¸ÅÂÊÂÛÓëËæ»ú·ÖÎö
|
Reviewer #1: This paper considers strong convergence of rowwise negatively orthant dependent random variables. Although I did not check all the detailed proofs, I found the mathematics used here looks correct. However, the presentation style should be changed for a better readability. First of all, the title of Section 1 can be switched to Introduction and main result, where you can state motivation, history, definitions, regularity conditions, and main theorems. Then you create Section 2 for the proofs, where you put the preliminary results and proofs of theorems. Also, conditions (1.7)-(1.9) and (1.11)-(1.14) may be stated in the associated theorems. Since this is basically an extension of independent variables, the techniques used here might resemble those in earlier work. Thus some steps may be condensed without damaging the content. Reviewer #2: In this paper, the author studies the convergence of partial sums of rowwise NOD random variables. Although this paper is motivated by statistical application to reliability, this paper only considers a limit theorem, so the motive of this paper is a bit artificial for statisticians. This may be a weak point of this paper. To enrich the motivation and background on this subject, the author is required to cite more recent relevant results published in international journals. The mathematics sounds correct, but many of proofs are standard arguments and some of them may be reduced. Overall, English in this article is fine, but the author can consult a native speaker. And give the full word of NA and the meaning of it. |
8Â¥2009-09-09 22:36:14
yccycc
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 17 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 1921.7
- É¢½ð: 10
- ºì»¨: 4
- Ìû×Ó: 1076
- ÔÚÏß: 64.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 478326
- ×¢²á: 2007-12-14
- רҵ: ÎÞ»ú·Ç½ðÊôÀà¹âµçÐÅÏ¢Ó빦
9Â¥2009-09-11 00:11:21
hellysir
Òø³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 6 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 347.1
- É¢½ð: 400
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 779
- ÔÚÏß: 41.3Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 380173
- ×¢²á: 2007-05-23
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: º£ÑóµØÖÊѧ
Ͷ¸åTerra NovaµÄÉó¸åÒâ¼û
|
Reviewer: 1 The paper provides some good information regarding the XXXX. The paper is of reasonably broad international interest and should be of interest to readers of XXXX. Some sections of the text need rephrasing as they are a little unclear as they stand and there are a number of points that need to be addressed before publication. These are as follows: Reviewer: 2 This ms describes a study of XXXX in XXXX and their use in XXXX. It is an extension of similar work done by the two lead authors on mode and will be of interest to geologists in general and marine geologists in particular. The ms is generally well written and easy to follow, although there are some typos and confusing sentences. There are a few problems with the reference list. This, however, does not negate the findings. |
10Â¥2009-09-11 01:29:03














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥

20