Effects of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer Application on Growth, Yield, and Grain Quality of Rice

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Notes for authors

The article, Effects of Organic and Chemical Fertilizers Application on Growth, Yield, and Grain Quality of Rice, presented for evaluation, contains important content concerning the comparison of the effect of organic and mineral fertilization on the yield of an economically important grain species, which is rice. The aspect of originality concerns research on the evaluation of the use of different proportions of mineral-organic fertilization in relation to the quality characteristics of rice grain, which determine the final consumption values ​​and nutritional value of the obtained crop. The research goal specified in the article is correctly formulated and fully correspond to the topic of the work. In addition, the information provided in the abstract comprehensively describes the key messages presented throughout the article. Despite the generally positive assessment, in my opinion, some correction of some content of the presented publications should be made. Here are my comments:

In the title, he proposes to change the name "Chemical Fertilizers" to Mineral Fertilizers or Inorganic Fertilizers.

In the Introduction chapter, lines 57-58, this sentence does not correspond to the topic of the publication. After all, we do not use mineral fertilizers in organic farming.

Rows 67-68, the information presented here should be based on more recent literature data, especially as it relates to statistical information. Currently, it is 2020, while the data referred to by the authors of the publication refer to the period from 11-12 years ago.

Chapter Materials and Methods:

Rows 82-84, in what proportions the fertilization doses were applied in the given three dates of their application.

Line 92, it is imperative to explain what the irrigation dates, single and seasonal irrigation rates, and irrigation system were, and what irrigation control method was used. Moreover, the publication does not mention the precipitation and thermal conditions that occurred during the experiments, so they cannot be assessed, despite the fact that the use of irrigation, according to the authors of the publication, was dependent on these conditions.

Chapter Discussion;

Rows 240-242, the information presented here, are not referenced in the research results presented in the publication.

In the section Conclusions, he proposes its summary to be presented in the form of several separate conclusions for greater clarity of the information contained therein.

The selection of literature is correct, it contains relevant and current items fully corresponding to the topic and purpose of the work.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

line 15 preferred quality of what?

line 19 is ambiguous, are you using 50% nitrogen and 50% P or is it 50% for some mixture of N and P?

line 28 are or were, authors need to more consistently write in past tense. English editing is needed.

The last sentence in abstract was not proven.  In this research authors consistently report that any and all applications of chemical fertilizer causes environmental pollution.  This manuscript did not research pollution or runoff of chemical fertilizers, so this should not be reported as a conclusion.

line 35  Rice is considered as

line 43 criticizes? or criticism But the whole sentence represents the authors personal feeling, not proven by this research.  This has been repeated excessively often in this manuscript.

line 45 Did your N and K treatment contain heavy metals?  So is your statement always true?

l 57 high or higher?

Sec 2.1 Authors need to describe what type of sawdust was used and was it composted before application.  If it was fresh sawdust it would contain so much carbon that it would also use up a lot of N just to break it down before plants could use it.  Also state source of manure, type of animal manure.  Was this manure well composted before application?  How long of period was it applied to field before planting?

Table 2, 30 cm is quite deep. How did you get soil samples from that depth?  What about at a 15 cm depth?

l 100, describe your physical properties.  What constitutes a perfect, vs imperfect kernel?  How many seeds did you look at per treatment?  What sieve size determines broken grains?  How do any of these factors relate to head rice yield?

Describe the taste analyzer and the chemical constituents obtained.  Did it also give amylopectin content or total starch content?  Table 5, are chemical % in dry basis or as is moisture basis? 

Table 4. What was the moisture content of the rice measured for grain yield?  How was moisture determined, or if not determined how would you be able to make yield comparisons.

Table 5 is curious that all 3 constituents, protein, amylose content, and lipids can go up at the same time for the AMRD treatment.  Usually 1 or 2 constituents may go up but the other has to go down when one determines constituents of cereal grains. Percentages are the sum of their parts.

Table 4 Ripened ratio?

The manuscript shows value of two types of organic material when mixed with N and P on yield and quality of rice.  Let that be your message without being so critical of all chemical fertilizer use.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

line 111 non-destructive

line 235 linear not liner

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx