Effects of Spraying Calcium Fertilizer on Photosynthesis, Mineral Content, Sugar–Acid Metabolism and Fruit Quality of Fuji Apples
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Wang et al . 2022 Effects of Spraying Calcium Fertilizer on Photosynthetic Characteristics, Mineral Element Content, Sugar and Acid Metabolism and Quality of Fuji Apple. Agronomy Oct 2022
General comments: The aim of this study was to study the effects of spraying calcium fertilizers on apple trees on photosynthetic function, mineral element absorption, sugar and acid metabolism, and fruit quality ofFuji apple.
This is a well done study and the language and style are well written and fine. Some comments are following below:
Title: Try to make the title shorter and more precise
Abstract: It gives a good overview about the different topics discussed in the manuscript. However I suggest to add in where the study was done and when.
General management and crop loads are not mentioned like thinning
1.Introduction:
It is well described the different approaches in order to improve fruit quality.
Try to add in the effect of Ca application on storage.
Crop loads has an effect on fruit quality. Try to bring it in to this chapter.
2.M&M.
Try to describe more about the management like fertilizing program, thinning, irrigation etc
Information about the pest program is not mentioned. In addition to describing the climate in general, I suggest to add in one figure informing about the climate during the experimental period. If available, fruit set data will strengthen the cop load part. When was flowering?
L113. What about other minerals like, both macro and micro elements?
L163. What criteria is used for harvest prediction? Firmness, colour, starch content?
3. Results
I suggest to reorganize this chapter. Start with the main pomological parameters – table 8 and table nine, fig 1-3. Crop load per tree is missing and starch content (iodine test). Next is to describe the mineral contents of the leaves and the plant physiological analysis by the end (pigments, photosynthesis and its parameters, enzymes). Data from Ca- analysis as the most important is presented and a few other minerals. However, what about other minerals if analyzed?
What are the optimum levels in the leaves of these minerals, any deficiencies? It does not make much sense to write mineral contents are increasing or decreasing. It has to refer to recommended levels based on research.
What about fruit decay. Is rotten fruits found? In case what diseases?
4. Discussion
Start the same way of discussing the order of different parameters as suggested under the result chapter. Yield is important in order to explain and discuss other parameters measured/analyzed. Include discussion of the weather data this particular year in relation to the average weather.
Summary.
Try to write about the benefits of calcium applications in addition to listing up the physiological and pomological effects.
I recommend this manuscript to be accepted with major revisions.
Author Response
Dear reviewer，
Please see the attachment. Thank you very much.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript is very interesting to readers and well written. Introduction provides a good background, materials and methods are clear, results wide and well explained, discussion and conclusions are supported by results.
Just some advice:
1) Would be interesting to find some reference for the sentences given in lines 43-44-45.
2) I would like to see a simple clarifying drawing of the field map, highlighting trees belonging to the 3 groups, the 3 replications for each group, and the 5 trees for each replication.
Just some minor revision:
1) Error in Table 1 in the letters about Car in 5.24 (2.53±0.05a, 2.44±0.03ab, 2.51±0.11a) and in 6.24 (2.63±0.11ab, 2.74±0.02a, 2.53±0.09bc)
2) There is an error in Table 1 in the letters about Chl in 10.27 (2.27±0.01ab, 2.37±0.15a, 2.05±0.12c)
3) Errors in Table 6 in the letters about Ca(%) in 8.28, Ca(%) in 10.27, Cu(%) in 10.27, Zn(%) in 8.28, Zn(%) in 9.27.
4) No letter in Table 6, Zn(%) in 10.27
5) Errors in Table 7 Ca(%) in 7.28, Ca (%) in 8.28 and Cu (%) in 6.24
6) Figure 2B, no letters d and h
7) Figure 3C no letters d and g
8) Figure 4A no letter c
9) Figure 4B no letter e
10) Figure 4C no letters d and h
11) Figure 4D no letter b
12) Figure 5A no letter e
13) Figure 5B no letter e
14) Figure 5C no letter b
15) Figure 5D no letter d
Author Response
Dear reviewer，
Please see the attachment. Thank you very much.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
Thank you for sending me the revised manuscript.
My comments are taken into acount and I recommend the manuscript to be published
