Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium Adsorption and Desorption Improvement and Soil Buffering Capacity Using Clinoptilolite Zeolite

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is very well written. It is an interesting read. 

-Conclusion: I suggest the authors to talk about the answers to the two research questions raised at the start of the manuscript L92-95. As a conclusion, it will be good if a direct answer is provided for how the CZ should be used to retain the NPK in soil and buffer the soil capacity, and what is the optimum rate of the CZ recommended through this study. 

-What is the limitation to the results obtained in the study should also be discussed, especially if one of the research questions is on the optimum CZ rate as the application rate would depend on a number of parameters including pH/soil acidity, type of vegetation cover, etc. 

Two errors:

L65: Change to “Change in soil pH depends”..

L81: “selectively absorb” or “adsorb?

Author Response

Please find our response section by section and point by point in the attached file.

Thank you and best regards,

Dr. Latifah Omar

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The Manuscript “Nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium adsorption and desorption improvement and soil buffering capacity using clinoptilolite zeolite” requires revision. The specific comments are given below.

1. Remove abbreviations from the summary. Explain in the text.
2. How many repetitions have the tests been performed? Add standard deviations to the results.
3. In the description of the statistical analyzes, add the significance levels.
4. The manuscript discussion part needs more discussion and compared with other research results.
5. Extend your conclusions with the most important results.
6. Add „Abbreviations” before „References”.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Kindly refer to the attached document on our response to your comments and suggestions. Thank you for your kind help and cooperation.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf