24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

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

shangqixu

铜虫 (小有名气)

应助: 1 (幼儿园)
金币: 361.6
帖子: 53
在线: 69.3小时
虫号: 1390621
注册: 2011-09-05
性别: GG
专业: 微生物生态学

[求助] 新手求助，曲折的稿子

一篇稿子第一次投了Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.，修回后直接被拒，当时修改是找的他们的副主编（老板认识）给帮忙修改的，他还说基本上让修改就没问题，结果后来直接据了，第二次又投的Soil and Tillage Research，直接被拒，现在投PEDOSPHERE，审稿意见回来了，要求Reconsidered after major revision ，我已经不敢再改了。。。

，下面是两位审稿人的意见，求各位大侠帮帮忙啊。怎么改比较好啊，第二位审稿人表示数据不足，但需要几年前的实验数据，根本没有办法补充实验，补充数据啊。大家教教我该怎么说呢，这次再被拒，我。我。我。。。。
More research is still needed to be conducted in lowland soils (i.e., in rice production). The authors proposed two methods to quantify the SOC stocks. The discrepancy in the results from both methods has been noted, indicating that the overall SOC pool may not be sensitive enough to reflect such changes due to tillage treatments. Alternatively, more sensitive or labile SOC pool(s) is needed. Also, the follow questions should be clarified prior to be considered for publication.

Major Questions:
1. The differences in SOC stock (Table III, on page 7) between NT and PT at 0-80 cm were 3.7% and 3.3% for FD and EMS, respectively. However, the statistic analysis indicated that the smaller one was significant. How can you explain that? What was the p-value for the ANNOVA?
2. Using the proposed method, the SOC mass (Table I) of the FD method was around 84 Mg C ha-1 for the background soil. However, the greatest SOC at 0-20 cm in rice production was less than 66 Mg C ha-1. Does it suggest that rice production overall decrease SOC?
3. The English should be improved for better understanding your studies.
4. Please provide specific operators for each equation listed.

Minor Questions:
1. Page 1, Line 7. Changes in tillage practice does not guranteen increase in SOC, even for conservational tillage.
2. Page 2, Line3 13-18. Please provide reasonable explanation(s) why paddy soils have more SOC than upland soils.
3. Page 3. Please provide rice cultivar information in the section of experimental design.
4. Page 3, Line 39. What do you mean SOC of the grains? The organic carbon content?
5. Page 5, Line 9. Can you read the equation?
6. Page 12, Line 14. Change ‘effect…’ to ‘Effect…’.

I think the results and conclusions reached by the authors from their investigation are probably correct, but in my experience the results from studies such as this during the first few years may differ somewhat from those measured if the study is continued for a longer period of time. That may not be the case in this situation, but it may be something the authors want to consider. Hopefully this study is still ongoing and measurements continue to be collected.

My only concern regarding the whole manuscript is that no measurements were made of soil C levels before the experimental treatments were applied. It would greatly strengthen the conclusions of the authors if they could show where the soils were at the beginning and where they are after 4 years of these tillage treatments. There are general results presented for the soil in Table 1, but no results are presented for the 0-80 cm profile. Somewhere in the discussion, it should be mentioned that even though there are apparently significant differences in total soil C after 4 years, there are no initial measurements to compare them to. If nothing else, it would at least be somewhat informational if the authors calculated the amount of soil C from the initial measurements in the 0-20 cm depth and then compared their results after 4 years to that. I don't know that the conclusions would change, but it might provide additional support for those conclusions.

回复此楼