Unveiling the Allelopathic Potential of Wedelia Leaf Extract as a Bioherbicide against Purple Nutsedge: A Promising Strategy for Sustainable Weed Management

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Please check all typographical errors in the whole manuscript. You need to improve your English also.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is devoted to the assessment of the allelopathic potential of the aqueous extract of wedelia (Wedelia trilobata L.) leaves in relation to a harmful weed purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus L.). The authors suggest using Wedelia extract as a replacement for synthetic herbicides that are ineffective against purple nut; in addition, frequent use of synthetic herbicides causes weed resistance and is harmful to the environment.

The research results are of significant scientific and practical interest. However, the manuscript contains a fairly large number of mistakes and shortcomings that require correction and adjustment. It seems that the authors were in a great hurry to write and upload the manuscript.

1.      Keywords duplicate the title. It is necessary to change them, for example, replace the names of plants with Latin ones, i.e. wedelia - Wedelia trilobata L., purple nutsedge - Cyperus rotundus L., and partially change the remaining keywords.

2.      Introduction should be expanded. It is worth discussing which biological compounds contained in Wedelia leaves may be responsible for allelopathic effects.

3.      There are many stylistic and grammatical errors in the text of the manuscript (for example, lines 363, 364, 379, 493, 427-428, 457-458, 464, 466, 469-470, and others). Authors should carefully proofread the manuscript for inaccuracies and correct the English language, too.

4.      Scheme 1 - point 2 is duplicated.

5.      When obtaining the leaf extract, aquadest was added to samples of the crushed leaf and kept for 24 hours. Weren't the samples mixed? Usually, when obtaining extracts, samples are mixed, heated, etc.

6.      Line 108: Did you use the same extract, or did you prepare a new one each time? If the same, then under what conditions was it stored?

7.      Line 113. How did you determine leaf area, root area, total root length? There are no links or description of the methods.

8.      Figure 2: How many plants for each option are shown in Fig. 2 b? Five plants? Quantity must be specified.

9.      In Table 1, the root area in treatment C10 decreases from 15.33 to 14.93, while the total root length almost doubles on day 40 compared to day 20. Is there an error here? In other treatment s, both parameters increase.

10.   Line 313 - the reference should be moved to the previous sentence, since there is no information on starch content in table 2.

11.   The conclusion should be reformulated; a phrase summarizing the result of research should be replaced in the end of the conclusion.

12.   References to literature should also be adjusted according to the requirements of the journal. Some of them are formatted incorrectly

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

English Language needs improvement

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Evaluation of the manuscript ID: sustainability-2759189

 General assessment of the research carried out and the results obtained

 The research carried out by the authors of this paper aims at the development of ecological agriculture through the use of biopreparations in the fight against weeds. The protection of the environment and the provision of healthy food for the population are objectives pursued throughout the globe, being particularized in this scientific work by combating an invasive weed species (Cyperus rotundus L.) with the help of the extract from the leaves of another weed (Wedelia trilobata L), which it is dominant in the area of Yogyakarta province, Indonesia. It is worth appreciating the method of processing the results, which stands out for its methodology and special tabular and graphic presentation. The results regarding the bioherbicide effect of wedelia extract on growth parameters, physiology, biochemistry and anatomy of Cyperus rotundus species, an invasive weed in crops in Indonesia, is essential in promoting a healthy environment by limiting the use of synthetic products in weed control. The scientific importance of the experiment is supported by the results obtained and by other established researchers in the field. In this sense, the bibliographic references are relevant for the topic addressed, comprising 46 titles, of which 17% are from the last 5 years, and 32% from the last 10 years.

• Observation: I propose to present the spectrum of weeds and the percentage of their participation in an agricultural crop (if there are researches in this regard).

 Scientific novelty

The experiment shows that allelopathy offers an effective biological alternative to chemical and mechanical weed management, without causing environmental damage.

 Observations on materials and methods

The working material and the experimental device are not clearly shown.

• The microclimate conditions during the experiment period should also be described (temperature, relative humidity, recorded precipitation;
• It is not specified whether the experiment was located in the open air or in a controlled system.
• In paragraph 2.4 from work (R 100-102): "In one treatment plot there are four experimental units. One experimental unit as the growth unit, one experimental unit as the destruction unit, and one experimental unit as a reserve unit"???? ............I think there are three experimental units.
• I appreciate the methods used in the determinations made and in the processing and presentation of the results obtained.

REVIEWER

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf