Modeling the Emergence of Echinochloa sp. in Flooded Rice Systems
, Maicon F. Schmitz 1, André R. Ulguim 2,*, André Andres 3 and Dirceu Agostinetto 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Editor and Authors,
In my opinion, the article requires a thorough correction. The introduction is too short. The information provided should be organized and supplemented with more information on this topic. The authors should also use the Latin names of the plants (weeds and crops) mentioned in the work. The materials and methods should also organize the data, specify and emphasize the research undertaken. The results should be described in more detail in relation to figures and tables. Data cannot be presented as a description as one sentence. Additionally, the data as a result should be organized and prepared according to Author Guidelines. Similarly, the information on the topic should be verified in the discussion. In my opinion, the authors should to a much greater extent emphasize which plants are concerned. Currently, these data are described in a very general manner. I have given my suggestions in the text. In my opinion, the article requires rebellious changes before it is subject to further procedures for publication. There are many ambiguities in it as it stands that should be cleared up.
Best regards,
Reviewer
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
I recommend broadening the Conclusions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
It would be fine to add one more experimental year - when you look at the data, the difference between two experimental years is relatively high.
Non-English (Portuguese) words occur in the text and in the figures - Fig. 4, 5 (previsto vs. predictions), hidrothermal - l. 131.
Tab. 1 - abbreviation ns. as a non - significant model is mentioned in table description, but it is not used in the table.
Fig. 2 - no rainfall data presented, even if mentioned in the head.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
The article requires minor corrections. Some of them are highlighted in the text. Generally, the article should be carefully revised in terms of author guidelines.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
