Next Article in Journal
Quality Control, Phytochemical Profile, and Antibacterial Effect of Origanum compactum Benth. Essential Oil from Morocco
Next Article in Special Issue
Increasing Potato Sustainability to PVY under Water Deficiency by Bacillus Bacteria with Salicylic Acid and Methyl Jasmonate
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of the Allelopathic Activity of Albizia procera (Roxb.) Benth. as a Potential Source of Bioherbicide to Control Weeds
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Influence of Microbial Preparations on Triticum aestivum L. Grain Quality

Int. J. Plant Biol. 2022, 13(4), 535-545; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijpb13040043
by Lyudmila Chaikovskaya, Nina Iakusheva *, Olga Ovsienko, Lyudmila Radchenko, Vladimir Pashtetskiy and Marina Baranskaya
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Int. J. Plant Biol. 2022, 13(4), 535-545; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijpb13040043
Submission received: 22 October 2022 / Revised: 5 November 2022 / Accepted: 9 November 2022 / Published: 14 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Regulation of Plant Immunity)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

innovative research...important contribution in growing grains to determine nutritional content..

Author Response

Dear reviewer! Many thanks for reviewing our article and appreciating the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

The present study focusing on the effect of microbial preparations on the wheat grain quality highlighted the importance of microbial preparations and the result could be a useful guidance for wheat plantation. While it contained some little questions and after revising it could be accepted.

1. Does mineral fertilizer K was used in this experiment? How much?

The amount of nitrogen used in this experiment was different? The bacterium could influence the soil nitrogen and phosphorus?

2. method of determination of protein and gluten could be given briefly.

3. Can author compare the costs and benefits in the application of microbial preparations?

4. The conclusion should be revised as the statistical analysis was not need to demonstrate in this part.

 

The authors should revise the present manuscript including but not limited to spelling and grammar.

Author Response

We express our gratitude to the reviewer for his comments, which we tried to answer in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1. The conclusion or potential impacts of this study should be added in the abstract.

2. In the introduction, a review of the relevant literature and further discussion on presowing seed inoculation should be added.

3. Line 83-84, "under soil and climatic conditions of the Crimea", is data from one site enough to stand for the whole country?

4. Line 111, details about the statistical analysis should be provided

5. Line 122, the meaning of LSD05 should be explained in the table footer

6. Figure 1, the error bars' meaning is unclear

7. Figure 2, 3, the presentation of the figures should be improved

Author Response

We express our gratitude to the reviewer for his comments, which we tried to answer in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop