Winter Wheat and Spring Barley Canopies under Strip-Till One-Pass Technology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

• Figure 1. is not relevant, I suggest remove it.
• Table 1. I think, number (91.7) of property organic carbon 2019/2020 is not correct, therefore is necessary check it out.
• Table 1. Check that the mark is spelled correctly: "clay (<0.002 mm)" . Shouldn't there be: clay (> 0.002 mm)?
• Table 1. What could have affected the increase in clays in 2018/2019? In addition, it would be useful to know whether the differences of the properties are statistically significant.
• Table 2. Air temperature provide average (8.1^oC), but precipitation is the sum (484.8 mm). I suggest the precipitation provide like average but not sum.
• Line 180–187. Authors provide in the text: “plants/m2” however in Figure 3. is provide “no/m2”. The numbers described in the text do not coincide with numbers of picture, so it is very difficult to understand. I would suggest to unify.
• Chapter 3. The figures in the text are not described in order. Figure 5 is described above, followed by Figure 4.
• Chapter 3. Describing the Figures 4 and 5 and Tables 4 and 5 in the text are not based numerical (how many decreasing or increasing).
• The conclusions lack numerical expression of the significant results (how many decreasing or increasing).
• The list of literature consists of a larger part older references than 5 years. It should be the other way around.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments on the manuscript and suggestions for improvement. Corrections were written in red against the background of the first version of the manuscript (also suggestions from a second reviewer). Corrections made and response to review:

• Figure 1 has been deleted.
• The number 91.7 in Table 1 was a mistake. It should be 9.17.
• The “<” mark in table 1 is correctly spelled. Clay consists of particles smaller than 0.002 mm.
• The clay share has not changed from year to year. The experiment was located in a different field each year. It wasn't a static multi-year experiment. In that case, wheat and barley would be grown in monoculture - this would have a strong impact on the canopy architecture. This is now better described in the manuscript.
• The sum of rainfall in months and years is the basic characteristic describing rainfall in the field experiments with a long vegetation period of plants. This method was used in the own research.
• The description of the vertical axis of Figure 3 (now 2) has been corrected.
• Chapter 3 has been reorganized as suggested.
• Figures and Tables are part of the manuscript and the data presented therein should not be duplicated in the text. As suggested by the reviewer, the most important increases and decreases in numbers are now included in the text.
• As suggested by the reviewer, also in the Conclusion chapter, the most important numerical decrease / increase in the volume of features is included in the text.
• In the literature list, 11 older items were replaced with references published since 2015.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Figure 5: it is necessary to add units at the vertical axis of the graph.

I answer the main questions (Agronomy Manuscript 1112178. 

The addressed topic (strip till technology also for cereals) is current. There is a need to expand knowledge in this direction.  

The results expand the information base for the choice of technologies aimed at protecting of soil fertility. 

I recommend a qualified revision of the text (English language). 

The conclusions are satisfactory. 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments on the manuscript and suggestions for improvement. The result of measuring chlorophyll content with the CM1000 pont-and-shoot chlorophyll content meter is expressed in relative units in the range 0-999. As suggested, this is marked on the OY axis of Figure 5 (now Figure 4). The English version of the manuscript was revised by a native speaker from Great Britain. All corrections in line with the suggestions of two reviewers have been made in red on the first version of the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf