The Effect of Growth Activators and Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) on the Soil Properties, Root Yield, and Technological Quality of Sugar Beet

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

You have started your abstarct "In years 2017–2019 field trials were conducted in several locations in Poland". It is not so good as reader cannot follow hat you are telling about. It requires background sentence at first.

L17 -contents of Nmin, P, Kand Mg in soil in comparison to treatment with full dose of nitrogen fertilization - Nmin should be N? Or need to define it.

L67 - Corg - soil organic carbor should be mentioned first.

L72 - Nmin- should be mentioned as soil meneral nitrogen first

L93 -In the experiment three treatments were applied: - Sentence should be alligned to left. Better to distingush 3 treatment by numbering.

L98 - BBCH - should be difined or explined properly.

***Table 1, 3 - location colum should be ajusted to fit Stegienka as a one word.

L156 - N‐NH3 i N‐NH4 and consequently - Typo? what is i?

What is the meaning of astrict in table 4 eg. 90.16a*

Which method you have used to measure alfa- amino nitrogen, Potassium, Sodium and sugars in Table 4? should be included in method section.

It is not clear how you said 30% fertilizer reduction in conclusion part. Besides that You have mentioned 70% redcution of Nitrigen rates in Abstract. It is not clear.

In addition, Have you checked any effect of location, and time on your parameters?

Please discuss your data with previous studies in your discussuin section. It is not worth to mention previous literature without mentioning the relatinship with your current data. Better to improve Discussion section.

You have presented data in table form. But it is more convenenit to reader if you can present in graphs as much as possible Eg- Tretement effects.

Reviewer 2 Report

• Check carefully the spelling and the text formatting.
• Discussion should be improved: starting from the results obtained with the present work comparisons should be done with previous works. In this section of the paper the resoults obteined should not be simply listed, but discussed critically. Forthermore, the previous works should be discussed just if compared with the results obteined with the research work carried out. This is a research article, not a review article.
• Conclusion should be better argued.

Reviewer 3 Report

Originality, technical quality of article is good, the importance in field of selected topic is outsanding. Authors did a good job of synthesizing the literature. The experimental methodology is appropriate for the purpose.

The discussion must be about own results and not about results of other researchers, that is why it should be adjusted.

Conclusion are justified by the result found in the study.

Tables and results are acceptable, but there are some comments and suggestions:

-Table 1.

-It would be more reasonable if all of soil parameters (in Table 1) after harvest would be shown in the RESULTS section, because the soil data after harvest are the results of treatments.

It should be written how were the available nutrients determined, what kind of extractants were used? Without indicating this, it seems that the total nutrients of soil were measured. Or other suggestion to write the “available” word before name of nutrients (P, K, Ca, Mg…)

-Table 2.

Reviewing the data of Table 2 is not easy. Better visibility would be if the sum of precipitation wrote by bold for example.

There are some comments and suggestion about article:

-lines 14, 16, 21

What is the correct name, it is written in four ways: Penergitc? Penergetic? Panergetic? Penegetic?

-line 17

N-NH₃ must be change to N-NO₃.

-line 43

It would be better to write “to stimulate “ instead of “stimulation”.

-line 55

It would be better to write “on sugarbeet” instead of “in sugarbeet”.

It would be better to write “to avoid negative effect of N fertilization”…

-line 66

soil “parameters” instead of soil “reactions”

-line 67

in 1M KCl (lowercase letter l)

-line 93

What does full N fertilization dose mean?

What were the type of fertilizers? It would be necessary to give the exact compounds of applied chemical fertilizer, because every fertilizer has different effects on the soil /environment.

-line 156

N-NO₃ should written instead of N-NH₃