| ²é¿´: 6079 | »Ø¸´: 10 | |||
sjtugtdÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
|
[½»Á÷]
No further commentsµÄÐ޸ĸãµÄ»Ø¸´Ôõô»Ø¸´£¬¾Í»Øthanks¿ÉÒÔÂ𣿠ÒÑÓÐ9È˲ÎÓë
|
|
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. Please incorporate all the final improvements and check all the Tables, Figures and References for possible errors and good quality. THereafter submit the MS again and I will forward it for the printing without further revision. 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 authors have done a good job in addressing my comments. The manuscript is acceptable to me and I have no further comments. Reviewer #3: No further comments. |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
ÊÛSCIÒ»ÇøÎÄÕ£¬ÎÒ:8 O5 51O 54,¿ÆÄ¿ÆëÈ«,¿É+¼±
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
» ±¾Ö÷ÌâÏà¹Ø¼ÛÖµÌùÍÆ¼ö£¬¶ÔÄúͬÑùÓаïÖú:
2013CRCÐÂÖø£º¸´ºÏ²ÄÁϼ°Æä¼Ó¹¤£¨Composite Materials and Processing£©
ÒѾÓÐ81È˻ظ´
¡¾Ó¢ÃÀ¾µäÊé¼®¡¿¡¶Comprehensive Dictionary of Electrical Engineering¡·(µÚ2°æ)
ÒѾÓÐ26È˻ظ´
Ammonia selective catalytic reduction of NO over Fe/Cu-SSZ-13
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
·ÖÏí¡ª¡ªÊÀ½çÉÏ×îÆæÒ춯Îïͼ²á£¨²ÊɫӢÎİ棩
ÒѾÓÐ219È˻ظ´
Status comment: No further corrections can now be made.ÇóÖú
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
Ç¿ÁÒÍÆ¼ö Ìá¸ßÓ¢ÓïÔĶÁ£¬Á˽âÎ÷·½ÎÄ»¯µÄºÃÊ飺¹ØÓÚÓ¢ÓïÓïÑÔµÄÎÄ»¯¹ÊÊÂ
ÒѾÓÐ245È˻ظ´
No further corrections can now be madeµ½online avaliableÐè¶à¾Ã£¿
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
Ó¢¹úÈ«½±T4ǩ֤-ÆäʵÎÒ¾ÍÏë˵˵×ʽðÖ¤Ã÷µÄÊÂÇé-¸½app8Ìî±í·¶Àý
ÒѾÓÐ46È˻ظ´
ÎÒ·¢ÁËÐÅÎÊÊÇ·ñÊÕµ½proof£¬±ä³ÉÁËNo further corrections can now be made
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
further study
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
ʯīϩÅÝÄÎü¸½
ÒѾÓÐ96È˻ظ´
No further explaination,hehe
ÒѾÓÐ31È˻ظ´
lwiaanngg
Ìú¸Ëľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 46 (СѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.773
- ½ð±Ò: 7403.2
- É¢½ð: 24
- ºì»¨: 12
- Ìû×Ó: 1211
- ÔÚÏß: 110.3Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 43541
- ×¢²á: 2004-04-10
- רҵ: Ó¦Óø߷Ö×Ó»¯Ñ§ÓëÎïÀí
2Â¥2010-07-16 11:47:59
padian
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 51 (³õÖÐÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 2399.2
- É¢½ð: 841
- ºì»¨: 7
- Ìû×Ó: 1141
- ÔÚÏß: 229.3Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 500995
- ×¢²á: 2008-02-13
- רҵ: Äý¾Û̬ÎïÐÔ II £ºµç×ӽṹ
3Â¥2010-07-16 11:52:02
yw__577
½ð³æ (ÎÄ̳¾«Ó¢)
- Ó¦Öú: 360 (˶ʿ)
- ¹ó±ö: 1.058
- ½ð±Ò: 156.7
- É¢½ð: 25691
- ºì»¨: 30
- Ìû×Ó: 19956
- ÔÚÏß: 1856.8Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 762234
- ×¢²á: 2009-05-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ¹¤³ÌÈÈÎïÀíÓëÄÜÔ´ÀûÓÃ
4Â¥2010-07-16 11:57:20
¡ï
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
Сľ³æ(½ð±Ò+0.5):¸ø¸öºì°ü£¬Ð»Ð»»ØÌû½»Á÷
![]() ![]() |
5Â¥2010-07-16 11:58:47
felicity6056
ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (ÖªÃû×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 6 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.033
- ½ð±Ò: 10189
- É¢½ð: 389
- ºì»¨: 6
- Ìû×Ó: 6696
- ÔÚÏß: 1053.4Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 762546
- ×¢²á: 2009-05-04
- רҵ: »¯Ê¯ÄÜÔ´´¢´æÓëÊäËÍ

6Â¥2010-07-16 12:48:05
ashun2089
ľ³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 3760.6
- Ìû×Ó: 294
- ÔÚÏß: 127.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 755020
- ×¢²á: 2009-04-22
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ҽѧͼÏñÊý¾Ý´¦ÀíÓë·ÖÎö
7Â¥2010-07-16 12:54:16
sjtugtd
ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 34 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 23239.3
- ºì»¨: 16
- Ìû×Ó: 3377
- ÔÚÏß: 1381.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 503488
- ×¢²á: 2008-02-15
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ÍÁÈÀÉú̬ѧ
8Â¥2010-07-16 14:17:15
ahpeasant
Òø³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
- Ó¦Öú: 3 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 111.5
- É¢½ð: 22
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 1378
- ÔÚÏß: 283.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 276779
- ×¢²á: 2006-09-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ÉúÎﻯ¹¤ÓëʳƷ»¯¹¤
9Â¥2010-07-16 14:35:52
sjtugtd
ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 34 (СѧÉú)
- ½ð±Ò: 23239.3
- ºì»¨: 16
- Ìû×Ó: 3377
- ÔÚÏß: 1381.2Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 503488
- ×¢²á: 2008-02-15
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ÍÁÈÀÉú̬ѧ
|
ÏÖ¸½ÉÏÎÒµÄresponse letter£¬¹©²Î¿¼¡£¡£¡£ 5 July, 2010 Dear Dr Tebbe, Re: Manuscript reference No. EJSOBI-D-10-00054 Please find attached the revised draft of our manuscript ¡°Soluble organic nitrogen pools in horticultural soils under greenhouse cultivation: a case study¡±, which we would like to resubmit for publication as a Full Paper in the European Journal of Soil Biology. The comments of the reviewers were highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. Below, we have provided our point-by-point responses to each of the reviewers¡¯ comments. The line numbers refer to those in the original manuscript. Revisions in the text are shown using yellow highlight for additions (reviewer #1) and green highlight for reviewer #3. We hope that the revisions in the manuscript and our accompanying responses will be sufficient to make our manuscript suitable for publication in European Journal of Soil Biology. We shall look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience. Yours sincerely, E-mail: sjtugtd@gmail.com Responses to the comments of Reviewer #1 Line 42: Replace 'ecosystem' with 'ecosystems'. This change has been made. Line 44: Replace 'On the other hand' with 'Moreover'. This change has been made. Lines 60-65: The soil types of the two sites should be given. At line 73, the following text was added ¡°The properties of the soil (a Fluvisol developing towards a Cambisol at both sites) are shown in Table 1. These soils had neutral to high pHs. ¡± Line 100: Replace 'quite high' with 'much higher'. This change has been made. Line 111: Replace 'relationship' with 'correlation'. This change has been made. Line: 120: Insert 'Reference' after 'plant uptake'. This change has been made and the reference to Ge et al 2010 has been included. Lines 146-148: rewrite the reference according to the Journal's rule. This change has been made. Table 1: The crops tested under different systems may affect the results of this study, the authors should discuss this. In addition, is there the same soil type between the two sites? Discussion on the effects of the crops (line 141-155) and soils studied (line 74 and Table 1) has been provided. Responses to reviewer #3 The title should be more focused and mention different types of cultivation (organic and conventional farming, open field and greenhouse cultivation). The title has been changed to reflect the reviewer¡¯s comments to ¡®Soluble organic nitrogen pools in greenhouse and open-filed horticultural soils under organic and conventional management: a case study ¡¯ The abstract. It seemed not convincing to generally compare organic and conventional farming concerning SON responses as you provide only data for conventional (may only be organic) farming under greenhouse conditions and moreover from different sites and the significances of differences between organic and conventional farming (see QCP5 and TZP in Figure 1) were not indicated properly. Therefore, you should rethink this conclusion. While the differences between organic and conventional farming on SON have been stated, lines 31¨C32, the following text has also been added at line 37 ¡®The reasons for the observed differences in pool sizes of SIN and NO3- in the greenhouse soils and the open fields include (a) the heavy applications of both complex fertilizer and organic fertilizer that exceeded crop requirements and (b) warmer temperatures and moist soils in the greenhouses, which are likely to lead to greater rates of N cycling compared with the open field soils. These results suggest that SON may be an important source of N in all horticultural systems, representing a pool of labile N readily available for plant growth. However, its concentration is less sensitive to different management practices than SIN. In contrast to SON, the total soluble nitrogen and inorganic N (SIN) pools varied widely with the different management practices although they were dominated by NO3- in all treatments. Soil organic N was positively related to dissolved organic carbon and NO3- contents. This relationship indicates that NO3- and dissolved organic matter play a key role in the retention of SON in soil.¡¯ We also add some more labels to Figure 1. i.e. QCP1 QCP5, QCP7 were greenhouse soils (organic farming), QCO1, 2 and 4 were open field organic |
10Â¥2010-07-16 15:08:49













»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥
¹§Ï²Ò»Ï 