对投稿到 Journal of Mountain Science 的文章而言，投稿后勿需修改就直接发表的情况应该几乎没有，一个好的期刊应该都有明确的同行评议制度，再好的文章在审稿人那里都能够挑出一些毛病，或者说都能够给出进一步完善的建议。这就是同行评审的重要性，也是很多重要的数据库收录某一期刊的基本原则。 此次展示的是一篇立意和写作都很好的文章的作者对审稿意见的详细回应。对初次投稿英文期刊的作者，可以从中得到启发和借鉴，如对审稿人提出的非常好的建议而且自己完全能够修改的，要在文中进行相应的调整和修改或者补充，对审稿人提出的好的建议但是由于条件限制无法实施，应具体说明或者是在讨论部分进行相应的阐述。如果作者不同意审稿人的意见，不必过激反应，而是应该礼貌回应并且说明理由。 由于此文有三份审稿意见，如果全部放在博文中，文字超出了博文规定的字数要求（终于找到为什么博文多次无法发表的原因！ ），因此，现将另外两份审份意见和作者的回复分多次贴到评论中！ Dear Editor, Dear reviewers Thank you for your letter dated February 22. We were pleased to know that our work was rated as potentially acceptable for publication in Journal, subject to adequate revision.We thank the reviewers for the time and effort that they have put into reviewing the previous version of the manuscript . Their suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. Based on the instructions provided in your letter, we uploaded the file of the revised manuscript. Accordingly, we have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode inMS Word. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different color (red). We would like also to thank you for allowing us to resubmit a revised copy of the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Journal of Mountain Science. Sincerely, XXXXXXX Reviewer 1： Comments to the Author Review of the manuscript “CONTINUOUSLY SUSPENDED SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MONITORINGAND ANALYSIS IN TWO ITALIAN INSTRUMENTED CATCHMENTS LOCATED IN ALPINE ANDMEDITERRANEAN ENVIRONMENTS” The manuscript presents a convincing analysis of suspended sediment transport data gathered into two monitored catchments located in different climatic conditions. The catchments differ also in shape and size, offering the opportunity for an interesting comparison between them. According to the authors, one of the main factor explaining the different relationships between Q and SSC, together with the catchment shape and size, is the different distribution of sediment sources and their coupling in the analyzed basins. I think this is a very interesting explanation but maybe also the different climatic conditions, in terms of rainfall intensity and duration, should be considered as a potential factor. In general, the manuscript is well written and deserves to be published. The analysis is sound and quite well documented but some points, especially in the section dedicated to the methods, need to bebetter clarified. In particular, some more details on the criteria chosen to separate rainfall events should be provided because it is not clear from the text (Lines 12-24, page 6) and Figure 5 how this has been carried out. Did you use any quantitative criteria for the choice between single and multiple events? We thank the reviewer for the very interesting comment. In fact, the distribution of the sediment sources and the degree of coupling play an essential role in the relationships between Q and SSC in both catchments. Rainfall quantity was analyzed in order to assess the beginning of the events.We studied rainfall intensity as a potential factor explaining the suspended sediment transport, but we decided not to include that analysis since data were not complete in both cases. Regarding the suggestion about the methods, we changed this part, so the method used to separate rainfall events has been described as follows: “In the case of continuous rainfall causing a multi peak flood event, it was divided into individual events only when it was possible to clearly identify the rising limb and the exhaustion limb for both water discharge and suspended sediment concentration (Figure 5a).Otherwise the event was considered multiple (Figure 5b). In this case, ΔT was calculated considering the absolute Q and SSC maximum values.” (Lines 8 to 15 of page 6). Another issue on the methodological section is that a description of hysteresis analysis is completely missing. A short paragraph could be added in the Data analysis chapter to briefly describe this techniquef or the benefit of those who are not familiar with this kind of analysis. We are grateful for the suggestion. To be more clear and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a brief description as follows: “The suspended sediment concentration was plotted versus water discharge and the shape and direction of the obtained loops were analyzed. The study of hysteretic loops is a technique used to analyze the relationships between water discharge and suspended sediment concentration at the eventscale. If the sediment peak SSC P occurs before the water discharge peak Q P , or if the SSC/Q ratios on the rising limb of the Q-graph are greater than those on the falling limb, the events show a clockwise loop.Instead, if the sediment peak SSC P occurs later than the water discharge peak Q P , or if SSC/Q ratios on the rising limb of theQ-graph are lower than those on the falling limb, the loops have acounter-clockwise direction. The eight-shaped loop occurs when a combination of a clockwise loop and of a counter-clockwise loop takes place, usually because discharge and/or sediment concentration present more than one peak” (Lines 15to 25 of page 6). Minor comments: The title is too long, I suggest shortening. SUSPENDED SEDIMENT TRANSPORTANALYSIS IN TWO ITALIAN INSTRUMENTED CATCHMENTS could be an option. Thank you for the title suggested. The precedent version of the title has been replaced, becoming “Suspended sediment transport analysis in two Italian instrumented catchment”. Line 25, page 1: bigger-larger (please correct this also throughout the text) Modified throughout the text according to the comment (Line 20, page 1). Line 50, page 1: could mainly be of - could mainly consist of We rephrased this sentence according to the comment (Line 8, page 2). - Line 3, page 2: here you could already state that the small alpine catchment is the Rio Cordon. Thank you for the suggestion, the phrase has beenc hanged according to it (Line 18, page 2). Line 18, page 2: remove “small catchment” if you agree with the previous comment We have modified the sentence according to the previous comment (Line 30, page 2). Line 43, page 2: degree of connectivity- degree of coupling is more correct We have changed it according to the suggestion(Line 2, page 3). Line 13, page 3: are to: a) do- are: a) to carry out…b) to determine We have modified it according to the comment (Lines 24 to 26, page 3). Lines 32-33, page 3: these data are taken from a quite old publication.Trevisani et al. (2010) reports slightly different data. Please consider revising land use percentage. Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the data presented in the work suggested by the reviewer (Lines 40-41 page 3) Line 33, page 3: “The sediment source areas cover 5.2% of the basin”- aquite recent Ph.D thesis (Cavalli, 2009, page 147) calculated that in 2006 sediment source areas cover a total of about 13% of the basin (considering alsoerosion on talus slope class). Thank you for underlining this deficiency. This section was revised and modified according to the information showed in the work suggested by the reviewer (Line 41, page 3). Line 59, page 5: the dynamics of sediment - sediment dynamics This phrase was modified according to thecomment (Line 30, page 5). Lines 9-24, page 6: please consider revising this paragraph according to mygeneral comment above Thank you for the suggestion. We have added the information required as explained above (Lines 6-28, page 6). Line 11, page 6: “in order to have a better uniformity”- “for a soundcomparison” This sentence was rephrased according to the comment (Line 8, page 6). Line 35, page 13: “exit section”-”outlet” (please check also throughout thetext, e.g. at line 54, page 13) We have modified this expression throughout the text according to the comment. Line 35, page 13: “disconnectivity”-”decoupling” We have changed it according to the comment(Line 25, page 14). Cited reference: Trevisani S., Cavalli M., Marchi L., 2010. Reading the bed morphology of a mountain stream: a geomorphometric study on high- resolution topographic data. Hydrology and Earth System Science, 14,393–405. Cavalli M., 2009. Caratterizzazione idrologica e morfologica dei bacini montanimediante scansione laser da aeromobile. Tesi di dottorato. Dipartimento TESAF,Università di Padova. Supervisore: Prof. Giancarlo Dalla Fontana;Co-supervisore: Dott. Lorenzo Marchi, 186 pp. Availableat https://www.researchgate.net/publication/37677178_Caratterizzazione_idrologica_e_morfologica_dei_bacini_montani_mediante_scansione_laser_da_aeromobile Thank you for the suggestion, we have added these references in the text.
Authors' response to reviewers' comments It's really a time-consuming thing to respond to each item of the reviever's comments.But it's a very important part totell the editor that you havecarefully considered thereviewers's comments and suggestions.Sometimes the editors will send the authors' response to the reviewers for further checking when an articles are required to make major revision. Here I show one authors's detailed response. ___________________________________________- The Revision Explanation for all Reviewers Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author: Reviewer: 1 1. The significance of LAI for mountain areas should be clearly stated and extended. Revision explanation: Thank you very much for your good idea. Indeed, in the previous version of this manuscript, there are no specific statement about the significance of LAI for mountain areas. But it is really quite important and should be stated carefully in this paper. So according to your advice, we added the corresponding contents in the second paragraph of “Introduction”. During these contents, we illustrate the significance of LAI for mountain areas from 3 aspects. The detailed information can be seen from those of “For mountain areas, ……Firstly……Secondly……Lastly…..” in the latter part of the second paragraph of “Introduction”. 2. Every figure should have its independence and integration. Place name(s) should be included. Fig.1 and Fig. 11 are too poor. Revision explanation: Thanks a lot for your suggestion. According to it, we have added place name(s) in corresponding figures. Many figures indeed have poor quality. In order to improve it, we redesign and reproduce each of these figures according to the specific requirements of the editorial office of the journal. 3. English language of this manuscript is rather poor. It needs great improvement. Revision explanation: Thank you very much for your gentle reminder. After our revision on the technical problems, another member in our group whose English is quite well has checked the whole contents especially focusing on the grammar and vocabulary problems. After that, we have invited a native English-language colleague of professor Arthur Cracknell to help us improve the whole paper. Therefore there are great improvement in the language of this manuscript. 4. The study area has a very strange shape. How is it defined? It seems that it is cut. Revision explanation: Thank you very much for your question. You are quite right that it is cut out from a large area. It is defined according to the main type of vegetation. As stated in the part of “2.1 study area”, our study area locates in Dayekou forest center in Heihe watershed of Gansu province and has several kinds of vegetation. But our study focuses only on one kind of coniferous tree-Picea crassifolia. Our field measurements are performed aiming to this type of vegetation and thus the models we establish in this paper can only be used for it. So we cut out the concentrated distribution area of this type of vegetation and as a result, the shape of it seems a little strange. In order to make it more understandable, we add some explanation in the part of “Study area”. 5. A total of 11 figures is included. Too many! and most of them have poor quality. Revision explanation: Thank you very much for your gentle reminder. Your advice is quite justified. 11 figures seem too many. So according to it, we move 5 unnecessary figures and only reserve 6 of them. These 6 figures are all been reproduced according to the requirements of this journal, especially on the format and size of them. The corresponding information in the text have also been revised. 6. The leaf area index (LAI) is ecologically important, but what does it mean for mountain regions? Revision explanation: Thank you for your meticulous reminder. Yes, the LAI is ecologically important and also significant for mountain areas. According to your advice, we further review and read many papers and then conclude its significance from 3 aspects. The 1st is from the aspect for controlling water loss and soil erosion; the 2nd aspect focuses on the characterization of impact on local climate; the 3rd is from the aspect of reference for the study of carbon cycle (carbon source and sinks). These are illustrated based on the terrain and climate characteristics of mountain areas. The detailed contents can be seen from the second paragraph of “Introduction”. 7. The title of the manuscript (Retrieval and analysis of leaf area index in mountain area) is not very adequate. The text did not include analysis of leaf area index. It should be "Topographic correction-based retrieval of leaf area index in mountain areas". Revision explanation: Thank you very much for your excellent advice. We have corrected it according to your advice. Thanks again for all your comments which are very helpful for us! Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author: Reviewer: 2 1. The authors present LAI measurements its relation with reflectance and vegetation indices. The efforts made by authors is commendable but it is not very clear how the authors have removed topographic and shadow effect. It will be essential to compare reflectance measurements with the satellite observed reflectance. Revision explanation: Thank you very much for your praise as well as question. As out study focuses on the retrieval of LAI based on the comparison between field measurements and the satellite observed reflectance (together with vegetation indexes) before and after topographic correction, so it is essential to make this key point clear. Due to the effect of topographical variation, there is a difference in the reflectance between shady slope and sunny slope, so we need to remove the topographic and shadow effect. This can be realized by using various topographic correction models which had begun from the beginning of the 1980s and become more and more popular nowadays. The specific model we use here is the SCS+C model which can remove the impact of terrain effectively based on the relationships among sun, senor and canopy simultaneously. Its main principle can be seen from equation (3) to (6). This model has been widely used and its effect has also been validated in many studies. In this study, the effectiveness of the correction can be validated from the different change on surface reflectance before and after topographic correction in shady slope and sunny slope. In summary, through the topographic correction in combination with the slope and aspect of the study area from the DEM, the solar zenith angle and azimuth angle from the optical image, we finally remove the topographic and shadow effect efficiently. In order to make all above more clearly, we revise some contents in the part of “Topographic correction” in this manuscript. Based on these, our goal can be ultimately achieved. 2. Authors may consider to write conclusion separately and discussion combined with results. Revision explanation: Thanks a lot for your excellent suggestion. According to it, we have written the conclusion and discussion separately in the fifth part of this manuscript. And also the discussion is performed combined with the specific result. After all these, the conclusion and discussion become more targeted. Thanks again for all your excellent comments which are quite valuable for us! Editorial Office Comments to the Author Too many figures in this paper. please move the unnecessary ones. And send all figures back as Tiff format. The fonts in the figures and pictures are required to use Times New Roman, and word sizes should be in proportion to the figures (charts, pictures), and the resolution for color graph and grey scale image is required to be 150~225dpi, and the resolution for bitmap image is 600~900dpi. You should ask a native English-language colleague to help you improving the language in the paper before resubmission. Revision Explanation: Thank you very much for your sincere advices. According to it, we have moved 5 unnecessary figures and only reserve 6 of them. These 6 figures are all been redesigned and reproduced according to your specific requirements, especially on the format and size of them. The corresponding information in the text have been revised. These figures are also been uploaded in Tiff format individually. For the language problems, after our revision on the technical problems, another member in our group whose English is quite well has checked the whole contents especially focusing on the grammar and vocabulary problems. After that, we have invited a native English-language colleague of professor Arthur Cracknell to help us improve the whole paper. So there must have great improvement in the language of this manuscript. Finally, thank you very much for all your excellent comments and advices again. These comments are very helpful for the improvement of this manuscript as well as our research in the future. We sincerely appreciate you for your fruitful work. Best wishes to you all!
http://pre.aps.org/abstract/PRE/v81/i6/e066202 Computation of the drift velocity of spiral waves using response functions Abstract: Rotating spiral waves are a form of self-organization observed in spatially extended systems of chysical,chemical, and biological nature. In the presence of a small perturbation, the spiral waves center of rotation and fiducial phase may change over time, i.e., the spiral wave drifts. In linear approximation, the velocity of the drift is proportional to the convolution of the perturbation with the spirals response functions, which are the eigenfunctions of the adjoint linearized operator corresponding to the critical eigenvalues =0, +-omega. Here, we demonstrate that the response functions give quantitatively accurate prediction of the drift velocities due to a variety of perturbations: a time dependent, periodic perturbation inducing resonant drift; a rotational symmetry-breaking perturbation inducing electrophoretic drift; and a translational symmetry-breaking perturbation inhomogeneity induced drift including drift due to a gradient, stepwise, and localized inhomogeneity. We predict the drift velocities using the response functions in FitzHugh-Nagumo and Barkley models, and compare them with the velocities obtained in direct numerical simulations. In all cases good quantitative agreement is demonstrated. 这是作者所在研究组一系列文章的一个总结类文献，理论基石仍然是第二作者，D. Barkley在上世纪九十年代发展的稳定性分析。 如其所言，计算response 函数的复杂性让一般，习惯于直接模拟的研究者有点发怵，别人我不敢说，对于我是这样的。 我感兴趣的是其中的resonant drift.
标签: response
