24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 5684  |  回复: 24
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

心会笑吗

铜虫 (小有名气)

[求助] 这个审稿结果修改后录用的概率有多大? 已有11人参与

Dear XXX:

Your manuscript entitled "XXX" which you submitted to Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Plant Soil Science, has been reviewed.

Enclosed please find the reviews of the above manuscript. On the basis of the reviewers' appraisals and my own, your manuscript is conditionally accepted pending revision.

Please carefully review all criticisms and suggestions raised by the referees.

Please keep in mind that this decision does not guarantee a final acceptance of the work. In your cover letter please provide a point-by-point response to each comment.

When I have received your revised manuscript, I will notify you of the status of your manuscript.

When you revise your manuscript please highlight the changes you make in the manuscript by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.

Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Plant Soil Science and I look forward to receiving your revision.

Sincerely,
XXX

Referee(s)' Comments to Author:

Referee: 1

Comments to the Author
1. Novelty of the paper. I do not see some novelty in the paper.  The aim of the paper was to compare infiltration /outflow rates during heavy rainfall under conditions of different treatments, slopes and with and without soil crust.
2. Results obtained by measurements (experiments) in laboratory are correct, they correspond to the known qualitative results of measurements published in literature.
3. Novelty are probably the data for Chinese loess plateau; but they are probably interesting to this region. I am not sure if this type of information (case study) can be published in this Journal.
4. I can repeat, that this study is good made. Formally, it needs a lot of improvements. Language is not good enough, there are presented some trivial information, like definition of infiltration, some terms are not used properly. Substantial language improvement is needed to sanction publication-important
5. Regarding to the influence of slope on the infiltration rate, it can be noted, that it depends on rain rate. At low rate of precipitation, the influence of slope can be negligible, but at high rates it can be significant. The rate of rain used here was extremely high, therefore the slope matters.
As many studies already are available on the topic you must highlight the new information-important


Referee: 2

Comments to the Author
General comments
Generally, the innovation degree of the manuscript is medium, since there have been some researches on infiltration under tillage treatments in Loess Plateau of China. And it is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar and sentence structure.

1) I think Fig. 3 is not necessary, since Fig. 2 clearly shows the infiltration rate curve including the steady-state infiltration rate for different tillage treatments under different slope angles, and Table I is not necessary, since Table Ⅱ shows the ponding time from different tillage treatments between the crusted and uncrusted soil surface including all the data in Table I.
2) In Table IV, the positions of Rtc and Rtuc may be opposite. The meanings of IRc-CK and IRuc-CK are not clear, and I think IRc-SS and IRuc-SS are easier to understand.
3) Enlarge description in “treatments” to explain the different treatments more clearly. As far as I understand there’re 24 treatments (2 soil surface conditions by 3 tillage treatments by 4 slope angles), aren’t there?
4) There is a lack of explanation of statistical methods used in the study. You need to provide more descriptions on the paired T-test and the Multivariate analysis.
5) The results should be compared with previous researches, since there have been some relative researches in Loess Plateau of China.
6) The conclusion section was omitted. You need to provide major conclusions from this study in a lonely section.
7) You provided an exhaustive list of references in various place. I recommend you only cite the ones that are most relevant and representative. In addition, the reference formats are not uniform, so you should revise them carefully according to the editor demands. 8) The 9th line: “The results showed that” instead of “Results show that:”?
9) The 28th line: “influencing” rather than “influence”.
10) The 45th line: “Tillage treatments sometimes were discussed as no tillage, mulch farming, stable mulch, minimum tillage and so on in the USA and Australia.” References are needed for the 2 countries listed in this sentence.
11) The 161st line: “Fig. 3” should be revised into “Fig. 4”. Fig. 4 is an example of 5° slope, but its representativeness is not clear and it can’t stand for the other slopes, so the relative conclusion appears unbelievable.
12) The 164th line: “Fig. 4” should be revised into “Fig. 5”.
13) The 166th line: the expression “1.29-1.56 times under CT treatment” and following similar ones are not accurate from mathematical angle.

Referee: 3

Comments to the Author
1. The manuscript dealt with the infiltration under tillage treatments and soil crusts in the Loess Plateau of China. One problem is that the authors used the changed soil in their experiment, compared to the undisturbed soil. Sieve could change soil particle composition and grain size distribution; while compressing could destroy the original soil porosity and soil pore structure. All of these will lead to the alterations of soil texture and bulk density, which are closely related to soil permeability. Besides, the soil used in the experiment has been processed into a uniform bulk density, which is impossible in the field environment.
2. Line 24-25: From the references you provided, you cannot draw the conclusion that “soil moisture is the greatest fact or affecting vegetation restoration and ecological environment”. I think the greatest factor is water resources instead of soil moisture.
3. Line 26-27: Please give detailed explanation about the sentence to make it convinced or more accessible. How could infiltration process increase crop yield?
4. Line 32: Is the term “a soil crust” or “soil crust”? Please clarify.
5. Line 34-36: What kind of impact does crust have on the erosion process, positive or negative? It’s better to make it clear.
6. Line 37-39: Rewrite the sentence please. The sentence “Effects of soil crusts on the soil erosion process have been studied for many years” has nothing to do with the hydraulic conductivity.
7. Line 45-46: What do you want to express through the sentence?
8. Line 60-61: After reading through the full manuscript, it’s hard to find the relationship between infiltration and soil and water loss, let alone the prevention of soil and water loss.
9. Line 62-67: “Interaction” is quite different from “combined action”. What have you done in your experiment is the combined action instead of the interaction.
10 Section of Soil Materials (Line 73-82): What have you done on the soil before the experiment could change the soil texture. Why did you select the uniform bulk density?
11. Section of Rainfall simulator(Line 83-91): The authors could use a picture to summarize these sentences.
12. Line 125: “to runoff”?
13. Line 125-130: The section of results and discussion is too simple. What about the situation under the crusted surface?
14. Line 152-153: How to draw this conclusion? Where is the table or fig.?
15. Line 206: The conclusion should come from the comparison of the crusted without tillage treatments and the crusted with tillage treatments.
回复此楼
我相信每件事情到最后都是好的,如果不是,那说明还没有到最后~
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

心会笑吗

铜虫 (小有名气)

引用回帖:
9楼: Originally posted by yinss at 2014-02-28 10:25:44
修改后接受的概率很大,呵呵,加油吧,反正只要是需要修改的文章,我都最终顺利接受了

我也希望啊,但是有曾经修改都拟接收被拒掉的,所以有心理阴影了~
我相信每件事情到最后都是好的,如果不是,那说明还没有到最后~
16楼2014-03-01 05:20:33
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 25 个回答

statsky

木虫 (正式写手)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
认认真真回复每条意见才是王道。沙发!

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
2楼2014-02-28 01:04:13
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

千帆过也

木虫 (著名写手)


【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
有一份希望,做十分努力,会有回报的!
3楼2014-02-28 05:53:32
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

oceanlike

木虫 (著名写手)

【答案】应助回帖

感谢参与,应助指数 +1
认认真真回复所有问题。编辑给你修改,说明机会很大。否则他何必浪费彼此时间呢。

[ 发自小木虫客户端 ]
4楼2014-02-28 06:38:16
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[基金申请] 投票:  有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的? +15 爱看书的可乐 2026-08-26 17/850 2026-08-28 01:23 by xxniao123
[基金申请] 哪位高人中了,把查询到的截图贴出来让我看看,让我长长见识 +5 yuleib84 2026-08-26 6/300 2026-08-28 00:02 by yudaoqian88
[教师之家] 导师吐槽:我怎么摊上了这么个极品研究生! +7 苏东坡二世 2026-08-23 7/350 2026-08-27 18:14 by 瞬息宇宙
[基金申请] 申请删除本帖 +6 lyz123lyz 2026-08-27 7/350 2026-08-27 17:31 by 宁静致远sy
[基金申请] 怎么看青基中了没有啊 +5 叶九微 2026-08-26 5/250 2026-08-27 10:35 by l_zh2008
[基金申请] 为什么 国际(地区)合作与交流项目 没有放榜? 10+3 majunge000 2026-08-26 11/550 2026-08-27 08:42 by 北京莱茵编辑
[基金申请] 2026年的国家社科基金项目通讯评审的新规则与新动向、新挑战 +7 process2012 2026-08-23 10/500 2026-08-26 19:23 by hmhminy
[基金申请] 2026年8月25日国自然放榜前突然收到列入评审专家邮件,有关系吗? +25 木水思豆 2026-08-25 28/1400 2026-08-26 14:53 by draco1987
[基金申请] 能否退出参与的面上项目解除限项 +23 koalala 2026-08-24 26/1300 2026-08-26 14:29 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 为什么国自然不能直接公布 +4 bjdxyxy 2026-08-26 4/200 2026-08-26 13:12 by qingmu1201
[基金申请] 国际合作可查了,中了面上 (EPI+1)(金币+50) +18 Ldrop2023 2026-08-26 18/900 2026-08-26 11:15 by cmrandy
[基金申请] 系统进不去 +4 yanglien 2026-08-26 5/250 2026-08-26 11:10 by wenfengw83
[基金申请] 国合可查了 +3 paperzjh 2026-08-26 3/150 2026-08-26 10:41 by LemmonTr
[基金申请] 今天务委会开完了,明天出结果吗 +19 angus9576 2026-08-25 23/1150 2026-08-26 10:03 by zp519
[基金申请] 国合现在查不到了吗? +10 chengyan1220 2026-08-24 20/1000 2026-08-26 08:57 by peasantsprig
[基金申请] 牛来!米来!面来! +8 beefly 2026-08-26 8/400 2026-08-26 08:37 by xuzhipiao
[基金申请] 在坚冰还盖着北海的时候,我看到了怒放的梅花。 (金币+10) +6 ziyangfang 2026-08-25 9/450 2026-08-25 20:26 by huagongfeihu
[基金申请] 人气不行了 +11 fansofjerry 2026-08-21 11/550 2026-08-25 11:04 by 孤独的英雄6
[基金申请] 建议基金发布提前给出明确的时间点 +13 kulium 2026-08-21 16/800 2026-08-24 16:27 by superceng
[基金申请] 应该是下周三26日公布了吧? +4 哈哈蛤? 2026-08-21 4/200 2026-08-21 10:58 by Vivilian
信息提示
请填处理意见