Exploring Microbial Diversity in Forest Litter-Based Fermented Bioproducts and Their Effects on Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) Growth in Senegal
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
SECTION |
LINE(S) |
CONCERNS/ISSUES |
Abstract |
General |
The abstract is a standalone section and should explicitly state the problem the authors are addressing. However, this abstract falls short of meeting this important expectation. |
|
Line 20 |
Obey the rules of structuring sentences by avoiding to begin with acronyms. |
|
Lines 25-28 Results showed that regardless of the litter 25 geographical collection site, the dominant bacterial taxa in the BMs belonged to the phyla 26 Firmicutes (27.75–97.06%) and Proteobacteria (2.93–72.24%), predominantly represented by 27 Bacilli (14.41–89.82%), α-proteobacteria (2.83–72.09%), and Clostridia (0.024–13.34%) |
The sentence is too long. Consider breaking it up to improve readability and eliminate ambiguity.
|
|
Lines 31-32:Variations in taxa abundance were influenced by the litter’s origin and the carbon ingredients used in BM preparation |
The authors should specify how variations in litter origin and carbon components influenced taxa abundance, avoiding generalization statements. |
Introduction |
Lines 47-48:In Senegal, family farming supplies local and national markets with fresh, perishable agricultural products |
Follow the basic rules of sentence structure.
|
|
Lines 48-55: However, the high added value of these crops, combined with their high sensitivity to pests leads producers to use unsustainable farming methods. These methods heavily rely on imported chemical inputs (fertilizers, pesticides), exposing the environment and consumers to multiple pollutants |
This seems to resemble empirical assertions that have been articulated after an investigation. Did the authors themselves conduct the investigation? If it was not, please provide the appropriate citations. |
|
Lines 55-57: However, some, including the use of mineral fertilizers and agrochemical products, have high costs and harmful effects on the environment. |
The word however has been overused in this paragraph |
|
Lines 61-64: Effective Microorganisms (EM) technology, first described by Teruo Higa in is a robust and versatile approach already tested in Latin America and Southeast Asia (https://www.emrojapan.com/what/), but relatively unknown in sub-Saharan Africa |
This sentence is quite lengthy. Secondly, is this technology unfamiliar in sub-Saharan Africa, or is it simply not being used effectively? |
|
Line 73: ….found that EM at concentrations of 1% and 2% improved seed germination and seedling vigor in Albizia saman and Acacia auriculiformis |
The plant Albizia saman should be italicized according to the rules of botanical nomenclature. |
|
Lines 83-84: Tomato is a second horticultural crop in Senegal and play an important socio-economic role in the Senegalese economy. |
tomato ranks second after which horticultural crop? There's no need to mention the second if the authors don't specify the first. |
|
Iines 86-87: The production has remained relatively stable over the past decade, 86 reaching 151,000 metric tons in 2022, with an average yield of 1.8 metric tons per hectare |
the authors should provide the current production figures based on the most recent FAOSTAT data. |
|
Lines: 89-91: Therefore, for this study, we produced forest-fermented litter products which we de-89 scribed as Local Beneficial Microorganisms (BMs) by fermenting in anaerobic conditions 90 the local litter collected in different agroecological regions of Senegal. |
Remove personalization in this sentence |
|
Lines 94-95: Then, the study aims first to characterize the microbial community biodiversity of 94 the BMs…… |
Delete the word ‘then’ from the sentence and secondly, what was the aim of this study? To characterize or to identify the BMs? |
Materials and Methods |
General |
This section should be written in a reported manner |
|
Lines 100-103: Local Fermented Forest Litters that we will call Local Beneficial Microorganisms 100 (BMs) used in this study are mixed cultures of different components with forest litters 101 collected in four different agroecological regions of Senegal following a climatic gradient 102 (Error! Reference source not found.) |
The text should be redrafted in a reported manner, with precise documentation of how sampling was conducted along the climatic gradient, including the number of samples collected and whether the samples were variable or equal. |
|
Lines 107- Figure 1 |
Figure 1 is not clear and not cited. The legend needs revision to fully describe the figure in a legible font type and size. Additionally, the sampling locations are shown but lack sufficient contrast. |
|
Lines 122-124: Thus, a second fermentation phase is undertaken to create an activated liquid product by mixing 2.1 kg of the fermented product with 42 L of water, 1.05 kg of yogurt, and 123 2.1 kg of sugarcane molasses. The containers are then hermetically sealed and left to ferment anaerobically at room temperature for 7 to 14 days until the pH drops to 4 or lower. Once ready, the liquid BMs product is coarsely filtered through a sieve to remove plant 126 debris and stored at room temperature. Thus, a total of 15 local liquid-fermented products, prepared with litters of different origins and various carbon sources, were obtained . |
Write in a reported manner. Additionally, I am concerned about the liquid fermented products. Were they analyzed to determine their nutrient levels before use? How did you ensure that the carbon sources were free of other nutrients that could impact your study, and how did you address this issue? |
|
Lines 142: ……16S rRNA gene with the 515F/806R primers set and ITS gene with the ITS3F-142 ITS4R primers……. |
Why did the authors sequence the 16S rRNA gene for bacterial identification and the ITS gene for fungal identification, considering that the two methods cannot resolve up to the species level? |
|
Lines 147-148: We then produced the final OTU tables containing the number 147 of sequences per sample per OTU matching the designated taxonomic classification. |
The authors need to remove personalization from the sentence. Secondly, the sequence data should be deposited in public repositories for reference |
|
Lines 152-153: The variety AMIRAL hybrid was used in the greenhouse test |
The authors should state or indicate the conditions of the greenhouse experiment |
|
Lines 160-162: The chlorophyll content of leaves was measured with a chlorophyll meter (SPAD-502 Plus), while plant height (cm) was measured from the ground to the tip of the stem with a tape measure. |
The Authors need to state when Chlorophyll content was measured. |
|
Lines 158-159: Each treatment was repeated 12 times including the un treated control which received 10 ml of water. |
This statement is imprecise. Does it mean that each treatment was replicated 12 times, or does it indicate that each treatment was inoculated 12 times with BM? |
Results |
Figure 2b page 6 |
Figure 2b has not been cited in the text. |
|
Figure 2 |
The legend does not explain how the relative abundance was normalized. |
|
Lines 186-190: A diversity of fungi was observed more particularly in the composition of BMs made with ingredients from St-Louis which, in addition to the higher dominance of the genus 187 Acidea (77% to 82% in GL-G, SL-GM, and SL-R), contain the genera Gaeumannomyces (100% 188 for SL-M, 3% to 13% in SL-GM, SL-G and SL-R) and Knoxdavieasia (1 and 3% for SL-GM and SL-R) |
The sentence is too long and lacks clarity. |
|
In addition, the Bannoa genus is present in BMs from the Dakar region (DK-M, 190 DK-R, and DK-GM respectively 0.9%, 0.6%, and 4.2%) and BMs from the Saint Louis re-191 gion (SLR, SL-G, and SL-GM respectively 0.5%, 11.8%, and 6.2%). The commercial BM, BJ-192 CCS, included in our study was also mostly dominated by Firmicutes (97.06%) and Prote-193 obacteria (2.93 %) with 2 most dominant classes Bacilli (97.04%) and Alphaproteobacteria 194 (2.83%) while the fungi class was dominated by Leotiomycetes (99.99%). At the genus level, 195 BJ-CCS composition was dominated by Lactobacillus (96,9197%), Acetobacter (2,8377%), and 196 the fungus genus Acidea (99.99%). |
The sentences is too long and lacks clarity. |
|
Figure 3 line 203 |
The legend should be enhanced to indicate how the normalization of relative abundance was done |
|
Line 217-218: ……..Principal Coordinates Analysis (PCoA), indicated that the samples 217 clustered according to their litter collection origin |
the authors should provide the PCoA diagram so that readers can follow the manuscript, either within the text or as supplementary material. |
|
Table 3 line 223 |
The table legend should be in a legible size and font. In addition the legend should wholly describe the contents |
|
Figure 4: Growth of tomato seedlings treated with BMs products at 28 days after treatment. A: Untreated 238 control plants; F: Plants treated with NB-R; O: Plants treated with DK-G. |
Improve the legend by making it more precise |
|
Line 246-248: Interestingly, root volume increased by 59.21% for 246 DK-M, 84.32% for DK-G, 85.44% for DK-GM, and a whopping 97.35% for NB-R. Root sur-247 face area also saw significant increases: |
Use a formal word instead of whopping |
|
Figure 5 line 264: Effect of BMs on tomato plant shoot and root biomass: (a) fresh shoot biomass; (b) dry shoot biomass; (c); fresh root biomass; and (d) dry root biomass. |
Enhance the legend by describing the analysis precisely |
Discussion |
Our results showed some variations in the structure of the BMs' microbial communities due to the litter's origin |
How did your study vary with those of the other workers? State clearly and why: |
|
General |
The implications of this study have not been adequately addressed in this discussion |
Conclusion
|
Lines 349-362 |
The conclusion merely summarizes the key findings but lacks a focus on future directions. |
Generally, this study examines the impact of local effective microorganisms on the growth of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plants in Senegal, aiming to enhance sustainable agriculture and improve tomato production. In addition, it also offers potential solutions for boosting tomato production in Senegal and sub Saharan Africa, which is vital for local food security and economic development. I therefore recommend that the Authors address the key issues raised before acceptance for publication.
See attachment
Author Response
For research article
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
|
||
Abstract |
|
|
|
||
Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors |
||
Comments 1: The abstract is a standalone section and should explicitly state the problem the authors are addressing. However, this abstract falls short of meeting this important expectation. Response 1: Thank you for your insightful comment. We acknowledge the importance of explicitly state the problem we are addressing; we review the abstract by adding the problem.
Lines 19-24: Reducing the use of chemical inputs (fertilizers, pesticides) in agriculture while maintaining crop productivity is the main challenge facing sub-Saharan African family farming systems. The use of effective microorganisms (EM) is among the various innovative approaches for minimizing chemical inputs and the environmental impact of agricultural production and protecting soil health while enhancing crop yields and improving food security.
Comments 2: Obey the rules of structuring sentences by avoiding to begin with acronyms.
Response 2: Thank you for your insightful comment. Lines 26-27: Beneficial Microorganisms
Comments 3: The sentence is too long. Consider breaking it up to improve readability and eliminate ambiguity
Response 3: Thank you for your suggestion. We have rephrased the sentence to: Line 32 Results showed that regardless of the litter geographical collection site, the dominant bacterial taxa in the BMs belonged to the phyla Firmicutes (27.75–97.06%) and Proteo-bacteria (2.93–72.24%). Within these groups, the most prevalent classes were Bacilli (14.41–89.82%), α-proteobacteria (2.83–72.09%), and Clostridia (0.024–13.34%). Key genera included Lactobacillus (13–65.83%), Acetobacter (8.91–72.09%), Sporolactobacillus (1.40–43.35%), and Clostridium (0.08–13.34%).
Comments 4: The authors should specify how variations in litter origin and carbon components influenced taxa abundance, avoiding generalization statements.
Response 4: Thank you for your suggestion. Lines 39-41 :“Although microbial diversity is relatively uniform across samples, the relative abundance of microbial taxa is influenced by the litter's origin. This is illustrated by the PCoA analysis, which clusters microbial communities based on their litter source.”
Introduction
Comment 5: Follow the basic rules of sentence structure.
Response 5: Thank you for your suggestion. We have rephrased it to: Lines 56-57: In Senegal, family farming plays a crucial role in supplying both local and national markets with fresh and perishable agricultural products.
|
||
Comment 6: This seems to resemble empirical assertions that have been articulated after an investigation. Did the authors themselves conduct the investigation? If it was not, please provide the appropriate citations.
Response 6: Thank you for your valuable feedback. Citations are added in the text. Line 60
Comment 7: The word however has been overused in this paragraph Response 7: Thank you for your feedback on the abstract. We appreciate your remarks and replace it by “Nevertheless” line 64-65
Comment 8 : This sentence is quite lengthy. Secondly, is this technology unfamiliar in sub-Saharan Africa, or is it simply not being used effectively? Response 8: Thank you for your comment. The authors have revised the sentence. To respond to the question, the technology of EM is known but not for the largest farmers, so most are unfamiliar to it
Lines 69-75: “These bioproducts are formed by fungi and bacteria isolated from soil or litter and can coexist in a liquid fermentation medium. Effective Microorganisms (EM) technology, first described by Teruo Higa in [3,4], is a robust and versatile approach already tested in Latin America and Southeast Asia (https://www.emrojapan.com/what/). Although known by a few in sub-Saharan Africa, its use remains relatively limited. These bi-oproducts are based on the principle of simple fermentation by farmers using native microorganisms collected locally from forest litter areas.”
Comment 9: The plant Albizia saman should be italicized according to the rules of botanical nomenclature Response 9: Thank you for your comment; Lines 83 “Albizia saman”
Comment 10: Tomato ranks second after which horticultural crop? There's no need to mention the second if the authors don't specify the first. Response 10: Thank you for the comment. The authors specify the first horticultural crops in Senegal Lines 92-94 :” Tomato is ranked as the second most important horticultural crop after onions in Sen-egal, playing a significant socio-economic role in the country's economy [19].”
Comment 11: the authors should provide the current production figures based on the most recent FAOSTAT data. Response 11: Lines 96-98: “The production has remained relatively stable over the past five years, reaching 152,950 metric tons in 2023, with an average yield of 1.7 metric tons per hectare [20].”
Comment 12: Remove personalization in this sentence Response 12: Thank you for pointing this out. Correction done on the manuscript lines 98-99
Comment 13: Delete the word ‘then’ from the sentence and secondly, what was the aim of this study? To characterize or to identify the BMs? Response 13: Thank you for your comment and question. “then” was removed from the sentence and sentence improved. Lines 103-105: “This study aims to perform microbial characterization of bioproduct BMs and to evaluate their ability to improve tomato production in Senegal”
Comment 14: The text should be redrafted in a reported manner, with precise documentation of how sampling was conducted along the climatic gradient, including the number of samples collected and whether
Response 14: Thank you for your comment. The text was updated Lines 107-109
Materials and Methods
Comments 15: Most of the charts or graphs presented are difficult to interpret or do not fit the context of the data presented, making them difficult for readers to read and understand.
Response 15: Thank you for your feedback. However, we respectfully disagree with the comment regarding the interpretability and relevance of the charts and graphs. The visualizations used in our study are consistent with those found in similar research on this topic, and the format was chosen to effectively present complex data in a clear and concise manner. But we update the graphs title with more detail to facilitate understanding.
|
Comment 16: The text should be redrafted in a reported manner, with precise documentation of how sampling was conducted along the climatic gradient, including the number of samples collected and whether the samples were variable or equal.
Response 16: Thank you for your comment. Samples were collected from several points in each region in order to produce a composite sample representative of the agroecological region. The GPS coordinates of all samples constitutive of the mixture have been taken. The mixture for the preparation of MBs, the sample collection shown in the figure, is by region. Furthermore, as you can see from the maps, Senegal has 6 agro-ecological zones with different climatic and edaphic conditions, and sample collection was carried out in three different of these agro-ecological zones plus an intraurban area.. Title update to provide more detail. (Line 114-120)
Comment 17: Figure 1 is not clear and not cited. The legend needs revision to fully describe the figure in a legible font type and size. Additionally, the sampling locations are shown but lack sufficient contrast.
Response 17: Thank you for pointing this out. We disagree on some points with your comment. Figure 1 was cited in the text (line 109).
Comments 18: Write in a reported manner. Additionally, I am concerned about fermented liquid products. Were they analyzed to determine their nutrient levels before use? How did you ensure that the carbon sources were free of other nutrients that could impact your study, and how did you address this issue?
Response 18: Thank you for your remark. We did not analyze the mineral composition of the crop residues used in the study, as it is well established that +these cereal and legume residues—such as millet stover, rice bran, and peanut shell—contain high levels of carbon but low concentrations of other minerals N, P, K and Ca (Paczkowski et al., 2021; Yimin Cai et al., 2020; Blümmel et al., 2010). This characteristic is precisely why they were selected to support microbial community growth.
Comment 19: Why did the authors sequence the 16S rRNA gene for bacterial identification and the ITS gene for fungal identification, considering that the two methods cannot resolve up to the species level?
Response 19: Thank you for your comment,
It is well known that metabarcoding with 16SrDNA and ITS is not powerful enough to determine microbial species. However, it has allowed us to understand the diversity and relative abundance of the microbiome (bacteria and fungi) in our fermented bioproducts, even if only at the microbial genus level. The results have thus enabled us to deduce whether the origin of the forest litter globally impacts the microbial composition of the bioproducts."
Comment 20: The authors need to remove personalization from the sentence.
Secondly, the sequence data should be deposited in public repositories for reference
Response 20: Corrected.
Comment 21: The authors should state or indicate the conditions of the greenhouse experiment
Response 21: Thank you for your remarks.
Lines 164-168: “The agronomic efficacy of BMs on the tomato plants was conducted for 28 days under natural light in a greenhouse at the ISRA/IRD Bel Air Campus in Dakar (Latitude: 14.701778, Longitude: -17.426229, Altitude: 9 m). The experimentation took place from January to February 2021, with the monthly average midday temperature ranging between 23°C and 29°C.”
Comment 22: This statement is imprecise. Does it mean that each treatment was replicated 12 times, or does it indicate that each treatment was inoculated 12 times with BM?
Response 22: Thank you for your comment. Each treatment was replicated 12 times and inoculated once, ten days after planting the seedlings.
Comment 23: The Authors need to state when Chlorophyll content was measured.
Response 23:
The chlorophyll content was measured once a week, using a Minolta SPAD 502 with a chlorophyll meter (SPAD-502 Plus) in the middle of the day, between 10 and 11 AM, under maximum light capacity. Line 177-178
Comment 24: Figure 2b has not been cited in the text.
Response 24: line 189: Figure 2b has been cited in the text
Comments 25: The legend does not explain how the relative abundance was normalized.
Response 25: Thank you for your remark
By normalized, we mean that the relative abundance was scaled to 100 (Abundance/sum(abundance) * 100). We adjusted the axis labels to prevent any misunderstanding
Comments 26: The sentence is too long and lacks clarity: “A diversity of fungi was observed more particularly in the composition of BMs made with ingredients from St-Louis which, in addition to the higher dominance of the genus Acidea (77% to 82% in GL-G, SL-GM, and SL-R), contain the genera Gaeumannomyces (100% for SL-M, 3% to 13% in SL-GM, SL-G and SL-R) and Knoxdavieasia (1 and 3% for SL-GM and SL-R).”
Response 26: Thank you for your comment. lines 203-205: The sentence has been rephrased.
Comment 27: The legend should be enhanced to indicate how the normalization of relative abundance was done
Response 27: Thank you for your comment. figure 3 Title adjusted
Comment 28: The authors should provide the PCoA diagram so that readers can follow the manuscript, either within the text or as supplementary material.
Response 28: Thank you for your suggestion. The PCoA diagram has been added
line 265
Comment 29: The table legend should be in a legible size and font. In addition, the legend should wholly describe the contents
Response 29: Thank you for your remark. The Table legend update
Comment 30: Improve the legend by making it more precise
Response 30: Thank you for your comment, Legend update.
Comment 31: Use a formal word instead of whopping
Response 31: Thank you for your suggestion. we corrected it; the word whopping was removed.
Comment 32: Enhance the legend by describing the analysis precisely
Response 32: Thank you for your recommendation. The legend was updated. Line 286
Discussion
Comment 33: How did your study vary with those of the other workers? State clearly and why:
Response 33: Thank you for your comment
The uniqueness of this study lies in the use of local resources (forest litters, rice bran, millet stover, and peanut shells available throughout Senegal) to produce local BM. It allowed us to confirm the presence of beneficial microbial communities, regardless of the type of carbon source used or the region where forest litter was collected. These results will enable farmers to produce BM using any available resources
We add new references and sentences in the discussion
Line 344-346 “While several studies highlight their abundance and potential benefits, the existing research remains incomplete, leaving their effectiveness insufficiently demonstrated. This gap often leads to legitimate questions regarding their real usefulness [27]”
Line 353- 356 “Lactobacillus are widely recognized for their holistic and ecological contributions to both agriculture and human health. Their remarkable capabilities include preserving and enhancing nutritional quality, serving as biocontrol agents, improving soil conditions, and stimulating plant growth “
Lines 364-369 “The locally derived Senegal BMs demonstrated greater microbial community diversity compared to commercial BMs. Among their shared microbial communities are genera such as Lactobacillus and Acetobacter. These effective microorganisms play diverse roles in crop enhancement, including boosting seed germination, fostering seedling growth, increasing chlorophyll content in plant leaves, and promoting overall plant development [25,38–40]”
Line 399-400 “The Dakar region of Senegal has been recognized as the source of the most effective locally beneficial microorganisms (BMs). “
Comments 34 & 35: The implications of this study have not been adequately addressed in this discussion. The conclusion merely summarizes the key findings but lacks a focus on future directions.
Response: The conclusion was updated with the recommendations Line 434-450.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The Ms. represents some significant scientific information and needs minor revision, which was explained below.
Title: The title should explain more about the research conducted such as "Metagenomic analysis of forest litter-based fermented bio-fertilizers and its in vitro efficacy evaluation on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plant.
Abstact and Introduction should contain more information about forest soil based natural fermented biofertilizers with their metagenomic analysis.
Results: Line no 172 (Error! Reference source not found.a).; please check and correct such errors throughout the Ms.
Discussion: Rewrite with more recent studies by focusing on microbial community analysis in fermented biofertilizers.
Conclusion and future prospects of the studies need to be incorporated.
itle: The title should explain more about the research conducted such as "Metagenomic analysis of forest litter-based fermented bio-fertilizers and its in vitro efficacy evaluation on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plant.
Abstact and Introduction should contain more information about forest soil based natural fermented biofertilizers with their metagenomic analysis.
Results: Line no 172 (Error! Reference source not found.a).; please check and correct such errors throughout the Ms.
Discussion: Rewrite with more recent studies by focusing on microbial community analysis in fermented biofertilizers.
Conclusion and future prospects of the studies need to be incorporated.
Author Response
Comment 1: Title: The title should explain more about the research conducted such as "Metagenomic analysis of forest litter-based fermented bio-fertilizers and its in vitro efficacy evaluation on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plant.
Response 1: Thank you for your suggestion. Here is the review title: Exploring Microbial Diversity in Forest Litter-Based Fermented Bioproducts and Their Effects on Tomato (Solanum lycopersi-cum L.) Growth in Senegal. Line 2-4
Comment 2: Abstract and Introduction should contain more information about forest soil based natural fermented biofertilizers with their metagenomic analysis.
Response 2: The conclusion was updated with the recommendations
Comment 3: Results: Line no 172 (Error! Reference source not found.a).; please check and correct such errors throughout the Ms.
Response 3: All citations appear well in the document. From our side, it should be a MS word reference problem
Comment 4: Discussion: Rewrite with more recent studies by focusing on microbial community analysis in fermented biofertilizers.
Response 4: The discussion was updated with the recommendations
Comment 5: The Conclusion and prospects of the studies need to be incorporated.
Response 4: The conclusion was updated with the recommendations.