In the right half of the Page 128, Lines 1–3; in the left half of the Page 129, Lines 1–2: “Gaseous N removal efficiency through denitrification (Ed) was similar in July 2010 (average 15.5%), January 2011 (average 11.3%) and April 2011 (average 14.4%), but was lower in August 2011 (average 6.3%) ( Table

1). The average Ed for four cruises was 11.7%.” should be revised as “Gaseous N removal efficiency through denitrification (Ed) was similar in July 2010 (average 31%), January 2011 (average 22.6%) and April 2011 (average 28.8%), but was lower in August 2011 (average 12.6%) ( Table 1). The average Ed for four cruises was 23.4%. In the left half of the Page 131, Lines 20–21: “Site-based Ed ranged from 0% to 29.5% (average 12%) of DIN for the four ERK activity cruises ( Table 1).” should be revised as “Site-based Ed ranged from 0% to 59% (average 23.4%) of DIN for the four cruises ( Table 1). The denitrification efficiency in the Jiulong River estuary in Table 3 (see last line of table) is revised to 0–59 (23.4). In the note, c Estimated as Ed = Δ[N2–N]/[DIN] * 100. In the left half of the Page 132, Lines 25–27: “JRE has a low gaseous N removal efficiency (Ed = ∼12% of DIN concentration; annual N removal = 24% of DIN load) through denitrification …” should be revised as “JRE has a low gaseous N removal

efficiency (Ed = 23.4% of DIN concentration; annual N removal = 24% check details of DIN load) through denitrification The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. “
“The authors regret that in the above article the following errors occurred: (1) In Fig. 3, the data sets for the axes of silt and sand should be interchanged. The correct figure is as follows: Fig. 3. Ternary diagram showing Shepard’s classification and sediment deposition patterns. (2) On page 284, column 1, lines 1–7, the correct sentences should be the following: Except at the two westernmost sampling locations of L11 and L18, the studied surface sediments of Laizhou Bay were predominantly composed of clayey silt and sandy silt; silty sand dominated samples

L11 and L18. The surface sediments of Zhangzi Island, except for sample Z6, were dominated by sand and silty sand; sample Z6 was predominantly composed of sandy silt. The discussion and conclusion made in this article are not affected. The Epothilone B (EPO906, Patupilone) authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. “
“Did the title of this Editorial catch your eye? Why was that do you think? Was it because it sounded interesting? Or was it because you would like to learn more about how to write non-boring scientific papers for this or other journals? Either way, you now know that a short, interesting title attracts attention (and readers). The technical content of your paper is of course of paramount importance. But if the paper does not attract readers and is not read it will have no impact.