Next Article in Journal
Exploring the Preference of Corporations for Sponsorship Motives and the Impact of Sponsorship Motives on Sponsoring Intention in Post-Epidemic Era: Using Two Different Approaches—FPR and SEM
Next Article in Special Issue
Synthesis and Characterizations of Fe-Doped NiO Nanoparticles and Their Potential Photocatalytic Dye Degradation Activities
Previous Article in Journal
Efficient Integration of Photovoltaic Solar Generators in Monopolar DC Networks through a Convex Mixed-Integer Optimization Model
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Optimization of Engineering and Process Parameters for Vermicomposting

Sustainability 2023, 15(10), 8090; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108090
by Rajesh Babu Katiyar 1, Suresh Sundaramurthy 1,*, Anil Kumar Sharma 2, Suresh Arisutha 3, Moonis Ali Khan 4,* and Mika Sillanpää 5
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Sustainability 2023, 15(10), 8090; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108090
Submission received: 9 March 2023 / Revised: 9 May 2023 / Accepted: 11 May 2023 / Published: 16 May 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study deals with a vital topic that contributes to preserving the environment, benefiting economically from many wastes, and reducing the time required to complete the composting process. In this paper, the researchers studied the effect of using wooden reactors with different dimensions on the efficiency of vermicompost production from a mixture of multiple sources using two types of earthworms. Also other factors such as pH, EC, and moisture content, temperature, C: N ratio, N, P, K, and pathogen content were studied. the final product was evaluated by using it in fertilization of chilli and brinjal production.

 

Abstract needs to be improved and give a clear general idea about the study.

Introduction is well organized

Material and method part:

It’s preferred to make a flowchart describing the experimental work of the study.

 Where is the dimensions of 9 wooden bioreactors?

In section 2.4: please insert the medium used in MPN test

In pot experiment section 2.5: please introduce the Types of used pots (plastic, bags, etc) and its capacity.

Also in section 2.5: please introduce the quantity of vermicompost added to each pot.

What is the type of soil used in this experiment?

 Tables and figures is acceptable and well presented

References in all the manuscript needs to be updated  

Author Response

File attached

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear author,

 

Your manuscript is suitable for this journal. But the similarity is 42%. It seems too high. Please rewrite the same paragraph appeared in the earlier publication to reduce the similarity.

(Reference : 1. S. Gajalakshmi, P. Sankar Ganesh, S.A. Abbasi,A highly cost-effective simplification in the design of fast-paced vermireactors based on epigeic earthworms,Biochemical Engineering Journal, Volume 22, Issue 2,2005,Pages 111-116,ISSN 1369-703X,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2004.09.003.

Reference 2: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-47257-7

Reference 3: V.K. Garg, Renuka Gupta,Optimization of cow dung spiked pre-consumer processing vegetable waste for vermicomposting using Eisenia fetida,

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, Volume 74, Issue 1,2011,Pages 19-24, ISSN 0147-6513, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2010.09.015.)

 

Generally, this paper support earthworms’ goodness for the environment.

Please italic for all scientific name in your manuscript.

Please revise the format errors in your manuscript.

 

Because no line number in your manuscript, I only can provide the comments based on the sections.

During the introduction, please give citation for these sentences: Currently, at MANIT campus, wastes are collected in the bins and disposed at Bhopal dumping yard and/or portion of wastes are incinerated in an open dump. However, this malpractice is of concern as it is very harmful to humans as well as animals.

 

Page 5: please add the scientific names for chilli and brinjal plants.

For Statistical data analysis, are you using pair t-test?

For figure 1, you can make the label words inside the figure smaller to make the entire figure more clear.

The “result and discussion” can be separately present. Maybe no need to write them together.

 

Finally, I think the Scope of future work part should be rewritten to make it much shorter.

Author Response

File attached

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Now this version looks fine. Only the format needs to make sure to fit the standards of this journal. 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Required changes have been made in revised manuscript.

Back to TopTop