| 查看: 2298 | 回复: 31 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
qinshuping银虫 (正式写手)
|
[交流]
大修5个月后变小修（本人金币少发10金币）
|
||
|
european journal of soil biology 大修5个月后变小修 Dear 。。。。。, Reviewers have now commented on your paper. They recommend minor revision and that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider your paper for publication. For your guidance, the reviewers' comments are appended below. If you decide to revise the work, please submit a list of changes or a rebuttal against each point raised by the reviewers when you submit the revised manuscript. Please note that minor revisions should be submitted within 30 days. To submit a revision, please go to http://ees.elsevier.com/ejsobi/ and login as an Author. Your username is Your username is: If you need to retrieve password details, please go to: http://ees.elsevier.com/ejsobi/automail_query.asp On your Main Menu page is a folder entitled "Submissions Needing Revision". You will find your submission record there. Yours sincerely, Yakov Kuzyakov Field Editor European Journal of Soil Biology Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: The revision is careful and intensive. The authors have answered my doubts and modified all the mistakes and shortcomings. However, I still gave a few suggestions in the PDF file. In general, I would like to recommend the publication of this paper in your journal after a slight revision. Reviewer #3: "Responses of soil chemical and microbial indicators to conservational tillage versus traditional tillage in the North China Plain" (Manuscript ID: EJSOBI-D-09-00085R1). I have carefully read and checked through the revised manuscript submitted by Hu et al. The authors have responded and satisfactorily explained the comments. This paper falls in the general scope of the journal. It is a concise and clear paper that investigates the soil chemical and microbial indicators between conservational tillage and traditional tillage in a Haplic Cambisol in the North China Plain. The overall design of the study is good. However, the aim of the study should be explained a bit more clearly. The language of the paper could have been more academic. Overall, I think this is a nice through study which yields interesting findings. I have no further comments on the revised manuscript EJSOBI-D-09-00085R1. My decision is that the manuscript is now acceptable for publication in European Journal of Soil biology. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
请问哪里可以有青B申请的本子可以借鉴一下。
已经有4人回复
-
真诚求助：手里的省社科项目结项要求主持人一篇中文核心，有什么渠道能发核心吗
已经有6人回复
-
孩子确诊有中度注意力缺陷
已经有14人回复
-
三甲基碘化亚砜的氧化反应
已经有4人回复
-
请问下大家为什么这个铃木偶联几乎不反应呢
已经有5人回复
-
请问有评职称，把科研教学业绩算分排序的高校吗
已经有5人回复
-
2025冷门绝学什么时候出结果
已经有3人回复
-
天津工业大学郑柳春团队欢迎化学化工、高分子化学或有机合成方向的博士生和硕士生加入
已经有4人回复
-
康复大学泰山学者周祺惠团队招收博士研究生
已经有6人回复
-
AI论文写作工具：是科研加速器还是学术作弊器？
已经有3人回复
| 祝福！！！ |
23楼2010-04-14 21:55:07