The Effect of Different Outer Cations on the Stability of Fluorotitanium Complex
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have made the corrections I requested, so I think it is fit for publication.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you so much for your reviewing! We deeply appreciate your recognition of our research work.
Reviewer 2 Report
In the manuscript ID: minerals- 1736744, the authors studied the stability of fluorotitanium complexes under pressure conditions of 100 Mpa and a temperature range of 200 to 500ºC experimentally.
This paper is a resubmission of manuscript ID: minerals- 1499357. Although the authors have had more than six months to complete the suggested improvements, they have ignored them and corrected only a few grammatical aspects, although I requested a complete revision.
I insist on my previous comments, just as the authors insist on resubmitting virtually the same paper to which major modifications were required. This paper provides interesting data that may help to understand more about the mobility of some elements in mineralizing environments because it raises several issues that I believe are not resolved. However, in order to be published, the text needs to be considerably improved. However, having compared the two documents word for word, they have made virtually no improvement.
COMMENTS
General
I insist it is a valuable paper. This paper contributes novel data and interpretations of the geochemistry of fluorotitanium complexes. In this paper, the authors establish a complete procedure to demonstrate the sequential evolution of these complexes. Provides a synthesis of current knowledge and extracts and discusses data from other experiments. They synthesize information as detailed tables.
The structure is satisfying, although syntactic and grammatical errors require a thorough review by the authors. The text is difficult to read, and not clearly understood. Many paragraphs need to be considerably improved. The authors sometimes use language that is not very direct and unscientific and includes obvious and unnecessary information. Occasionally the text is wordy. They should focus more on clear exposition and discussion of their data. Many errors are still evident in the document. Indeed, the authors have not addressed the majority of these critical errors in scientific communication that were pointed out to them in the previous review.
Visual information remains correct.
In sum, this manuscript is well-formatted and contains original information. But, I again decided to reconsider after major revision because it must be rewritten before publication. The authors have indeed rewritten some paragraphs, but this does not imply the suggested extensive modification.
References.
The authors still do not include citations and references in the format established by Minerals. At no time has the reviewer suggested that the authors include direct references to Minerals papers, as this would not be honest with the scientific rigour required by Minerals editors.
I add the rules set out by Minerals for the correct use of citations and references.
Citations and References in Supplementary files are permitted provided that they also appear in the main text and in the reference list.
In the text, reference numbers should be placed in square brackets [ ], and placed before the punctuation; for example [1], [1–3] or [1,3]. For embedded citations in the text with pagination, use both parentheses and brackets to indicate the reference number and page numbers; for example [5] (p. 10). or [6] (pp. 101–105).
The reference list should include the full title, as recommended by the ACS style guide. Style files for Endnote and Zotero are available.
References should be described as follows, depending on the type of work:
Journal Articles:
- Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, page range.
Books and Book Chapters:
- Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Book Title, 3rd ed.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; pp. 154–196.
- Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Title of the chapter. In Book Title, 2nd ed.; Editor 1, A., Editor 2, B., Eds.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; Volume 3, pp. 154–196.
Unpublished materials intended for publication:
- Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C. Title of Unpublished Work (optional). Correspondence Affiliation, City, State, Country. year, status (manuscript in preparation; to be submitted).
- Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C. Title of Unpublished Work. Abbreviated Journal Name year, phrase indicating stage of publication (submitted; accepted; in press).
Unpublished materials not intended for publication:
- Author 1, A.B. (Affiliation, City, State, Country); Author 2, C. (Affiliation, City, State, Country). Phase describing the material, year. (phase: Personal communication; Private communication; Unpublished work; etc.)
Conference Proceedings:
- Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D.; Author 3, E.F. Title of Presentation. In Title of the Collected Work (if available), Proceedings of the Name of the Conference, Location of Conference, Country, Date of Conference; Editor 1, Editor 2, Eds. (if available); Publisher: City, Country, Year (if available); Abstract Number (optional), Pagination (optional).
Thesis:
- Author 1, A.B. Title of Thesis. Level of Thesis, Degree-Granting University, Location of University, Date of Completion.
Websites:
- Title of Site. Available online: URL (accessed on Day Month Year).
Unlike published works, websites may change over time or disappear, so we encourage you create an archive of the cited website using a service such as WebCite. Archived websites should be cited using the link provided as follows:
- Title of Site. URL (archived on Day Month Year).
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have considerably improved the previously submitted paper. In addition, they have clarified many points that the reviewer might not have understood well.
It is only regretted that the list of references has not been completely checked. For example, the abbreviation for Chemical Geology is Chem. Geol., Resource Geology is Resour. Geol., etc. Please, use adequate abbreviations for each journal.
The effort made by the authors is appreciated.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the manuscript ID: minerals-1499357, the authors studied the stability of fluorotitanium complexes under pressure conditions of 100 Mpa and a temperature range of 200 to 500ºC experimentally.
This paper provides interesting data that may help to understand more about the mobility of some elements in mineralizing environments because it raises several issues that I believe are not resolved. However, in order to be published, the text needs to be considerably improved.
COMMENTS
General
A valuable paper. This paper contributes novel data and interpretations of the geochemistry of fluorotitanium complexes. In this paper, the authors establish a complete procedure to demonstrate the sequential evolution of these complexes. Provides a synthesis of current knowledge and extracts and discusses data from other experiments. They synthesize information as detailed tables.
The structure is satisfying, although syntactic and grammatical errors require a thorough review by the authors. The text is difficult to follow and is not clearly understood. Many paragraphs need to be considerably improved. The authors sometimes use language that is not very direct and unscientific and includes obvious and unnecessary information. Sometimes the text is wordy. They should focus more on clear exposition and discussion of their data.
The visual information is correct.
In sum, this manuscript is well-formatted and contains original information. But, I decided to reconsider after major revision because it must be rewrite before published.
References.
The authors do not respect the inclusion of bibliographic references as recommended by Minerals. The reference section should be extensively reviewed.
Reviewer 2 Report
Minor corrections:
line 10 - strong or strength?
line 40 - no point before the references.
line 44 - put elements after strength.
lines 150 and 159 - Baes and Mesmer, 1981 not in the references.
line 160 - Zhou and not zhou.
line 161 - space after et al.,
line 165 - data and not date.
line 205 - be seen from (with spaces).
line 205 - figure 2 or figure 1 (I think is is 1).
line 248 - Similarly and not similarly.
line 260 - Fig.2(a) - to correct. There is four different forms of Figure 2a!
line 266 - Spaces in Figure2(a,b)
lline 283 - two times the word "about".
line 286 - silicate(albite). Put space.
line 295 - Chen et al. (2002). In the references is only Chen 2002.
line 298 - Zhao et al. 2008. In the references is only Zhao 2008.
line 349 - He junjieet al., This needs to be corrected.
REFERENCES:
REFERENCES OUT OF ORDER: 02-10-20-21-38-42-48.
References not found in the text: 20-25-42.
References in the text and not in the list:
Baes and Mesmer, 1981
Li and Huang 2013 - line 365
