| 查看: 1635 | 回复: 4 | ||
| 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 | ||
feixiang113银虫 (著名写手)
|
[求助]
这样的情况能申诉吗？
|
|
|
我这样的审稿意见，可以考虑申诉吗？因为是本领域比较强的期刊，但是意见总觉得憋屈。要不要申诉啊，还是改投啊，哎，我觉得2个审稿人都没有特别重大的意见，其中第一个审稿意见还行，关键是第二审稿人给了拒稿，原因就是认为和2篇文献工作有重叠，其中一篇肯定没重叠，另一个篇是有重叠的内容，但是那些都是做这个领域必须考虑的影响因素啊，每个人都会重复咯，如果不做这些就不对了哦，我怀疑第二个审稿人不会就是那篇文章作者吧，此外第二审稿人提供的其他详细问题都看起来不是文章的重点，也和那2篇重复的文献观点不一致呢。 Editor: According to the policy of WR editorial board and the reviewers' serious/critical comments, this manuscript should not be considered for publication in Water Research. The Reviewer #1 shows possible publication after revision. However, Reviewer #2 pointed out serious drawbacks for publication in WR and proposes rejection. I agree the judgment of the Reviewer #2. Reviewer #2 also pointed out overlapping with previous studies without explanation of originality of this paper and weakness in explanation in experiments and data discussion. In addition, Reviewer #1 pointed out paper redundancy and provided fundamental questions, which means that paper does not describe research content properly. Reviewer #1: This paper described characteristics of multi-walled carbon nanotubes which can adsorb tetracycline. Experiments were conducted very well and the paper was written well. This technology must be applied to real water treatment process in the near future. Throughout the paper, the text is redundant. It should be condensed. Introduction It is unclear where this technology will be applied. Line 79-81 Please indicate why you have to investigate "the adsorption behavior of antibiotics on CNTs having different oxygen contents and the antibiotic adsorption capacity of CNTs". Line 72-88 I wonder why you separate effect of oxygen from other parameters. Line 86-88 It's may be better to revise such that various parameters are adsorption time, solution pH, ionic strength and humic acid and Cu2+ were used for comparative work. Line 100 What is BET? Figure 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c) should be combined. Figure S1 may be included in the paper. Reviewer #2: General comments The research paper "***" by* deal with the adsorption of antibiotics onto multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) in the batch experiments. Although studying the effect of MWCNT properties on the tetracycline (TC) adsorption is interesting and falls within the scope of the journal, the present paper is highly overlapped with previous studies such as Ji et al., 2010b and Zhang et al., 2011b. In addition, there are many points where explanation is not enough such as experimental conditions. More detailed comments are provided below following sentences. Specific comments 1. Page 3, Line 54: The authors should address "TC has become a serious problem" as well, and it may be appropriate to include references regarding this issue. 2. Page 4, Lines 73-75: The authors should address the differences in the objectives and results between reference (Zhang et al., 2011b) and present paper more clearly. 3. Page 5, Lines 91-97: How did you obtain raw materials and reagents to prepare MWCNTs used in the present paper? Please give detailed information about materials and methods so it can be repeated by other researchers. 4. Page 5, Lines 100-102: The authors should provide the measurement procedure of the BET surface area and the particle sizes/outer diameters for MWCNTs used in the present paper. 5. Page 5, Lines 104-105: Why did you select 20 mg/40 mL of MWCNT dosage? The authors should describe the reason regarding this point. 6. Page 5, Lines 106-107: Why did you select 7.3-151.6 mg/L of TC concentrations? The authors should describe the reason regarding this point. 7. Page 6, Lines 120-123: Initial TC concentrations between two experiments designed to investigate the effects of pH and ionic strength on TC removal by MWCNTs were different in the present paper. The authors should describe the reason why the initial TC concentrations were different between two experiments, and should address the effect of initial TC concentration on TC removal. 8. Page 9, Lines 181-182: The authors should address the differences in the results between reference (Ji et al., 2010b) and present paper more clearly. 9. Page 10, Lines 201-202: The authors should provide the analytical results of hydrophilicity and dispersibility of MWCNTs for further discussion. 10. Page 10, Lines 213-214: Is "CNTs-2.0%O" mistyping? It is not clear to the reviewer why "CNTs-2.0%O" appear twice in this sentence. 11. Page 16, Line 331: Why did you select pH 5 to investigate the effect of Cu2+ on TC adsorption? The authors should describe the reason regarding this point, and should address the effect of pH in this experiment. 12. Pages 16-17, Lines 341-354: The experimental data regarding effect of ionic strength is missing in the Figure 6. 13. Page 17, Line 360: Why did you select pH 5 to investigate the effect of humic acid on TC adsorption? The authors should describe the reason regarding this point, and should address the effect of pH in this experiment. 14. Pages 25-35: The authors should provide captions for all tables and figures. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
材料科学与工程求调剂
已经有13人回复
-
考研调剂
已经有3人回复
-
309求调剂
已经有17人回复
-
省双一流重点一本大学招收调剂
已经有5人回复
-
复试调剂
已经有7人回复
-
267求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
359求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
一志愿北京科技大学材料学硕328分求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
08工科275分求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
309分085801求调剂
已经有3人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 被编辑冤枉的判一稿多投
已经有74人回复
- 论文两个审稿人让小修，一个审稿人拒绝，结果编辑拒稿了，这种情况还有希望吗？
已经有41人回复
- 大家遇到过这种情况吗 Manuscript Accepted 后被拒
已经有35人回复
- 毕业论文查重问题
已经有7人回复
- OE（optics express）这样的审稿意见还有改的必要吗？
已经有23人回复
- 大家帮忙看看，这种情况如何回复编辑及申诉
已经有15人回复
- 投ACS下的一个期刊，新年第一天就悲剧了，这种情况要不要申诉下
已经有55人回复
- 求助：如何给英文编辑公司的编辑写申诉信
已经有4人回复
- 这种情况下可以申诉么？
已经有6人回复
- 投稿Langmuir，审稿人都说可以发表，编辑拒稿，这种情况有必要申诉吗？
已经有10人回复
- 投《稀有金属材料与工程》被拒稿，申诉，结果编辑说又送外审了，这是什么意思?
已经有7人回复
- 两个大修，一个小修，希望大吗？
已经有9人回复
- catalysis letter 拒稿后能申诉么？
已经有5人回复
- 投稿Biomacromolecules被拒，这种情况还有必要申诉吗。。。
已经有3人回复
- 编辑在什么情况下会选用自己推荐的审稿人
已经有16人回复
- 被J.Phys.Chem C拒了，2个审稿人意见差别很大，遇到这种情况我该咋办
已经有16人回复
- 初审没过，有没有人申诉成功过？
已经有58人回复
- 这种情况可以申请更换审稿人吗？
已经有6人回复
wangdj
木虫 (正式写手)
Ph.D.
- 应助: 43 (小学生)
- 金币: 3980.4
- 散金: 303
- 红花: 5
- 帖子: 351
- 在线: 157.8小时
- 虫号: 803373
- 注册: 2009-07-04
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 环境污染化学
4楼2013-11-25 17:21:57
zh10246
铁杆木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 348 (大学生)
- 金币: 13510.5
- 散金: 115
- 红花: 47
- 帖子: 14591
- 在线: 879.7小时
- 虫号: 2786456
- 注册: 2013-11-08
- 专业: 细胞外基质
2楼2013-11-25 17:08:25
3楼2013-11-25 17:16:34
googleuboy
木虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 747 (博后)
- 金币: 3118.8
- 散金: 4149
- 红花: 36
- 帖子: 6906
- 在线: 760.6小时
- 虫号: 1810740
- 注册: 2012-05-11
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 结构工程
5楼2013-11-25 17:24:12
