24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者ljbdh将赠送您 10 个金币

ljbdh

铜虫 (初入文坛)

应助: 1 (幼儿园)
金币: 2794.2
红花: 3
帖子: 47
在线: 99.4小时
虫号: 2095942
注册: 2012-10-30
专业: 污染控制化学

[求助] 审稿意见回复！！！！！！！已有1人参与

各位大神，小弟初投SCI，一个审稿人给的意见如下：
Reviewer #2: 1. The present paper is original and contains novelty in the research area on mitigation and transformation of heavy metals by enzymatic hydrolysis.
2. The abstract is clear.
3.The structure of the manuscript is not well designed. The speciation and distribution of each heavy metal was introduced and discussed one by one, which makes the manuscrippt more like a project report rather than a academic articles.
4. To support the objectives of the work, the material and methods should be improved, regarding sludge characteristics, its source and the number of samples. Is the sludge collected from primary treatment, secondary, a mixture of both or after an anaerobic digestion process? These need to be clarified in order that other researchers could profit of the results obtained by the author to advance in this important research area. As a suggestion, you could add a WWTP layout to explain the sludge sampling points.
5. In discussion section, I suggest a comparison (in the case of available literature) between the data obtained during your research with the results achieved by other researchers to highlight the importance of the novelty of your study.
You made the assumption "(...) such transformations and stabilization occurred regardless of sludge source and type, (...)". How can you conclude that once you have developed your study only with one type of sludge without any information regarding its origin?
6. The conclusion section can be improved adding a small sentence regarding the new achievements that are as main objectives in your abstract.

现有几个问题请教：
1.第一第二条是在说我文章写的还不错嘛？这样的该怎么回复，这个算问题需要回复吗？
2.第三条是说文章系统设计不是很好，像一个工程报告，这个该怎么回复？我的文章是按照其他同类的文章参考写的，一审后给的是Major revision,三个审稿人加起来17条意见，认真改后中的可能性大吗？

谢谢各位大神了，跪拜！！