Study on the Nutrient Optimal Management Strategy of High and Stable Annual Yield in the Rice–Wheat System: A 10-Year Term Experiment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
It is a good attempt. Just go through the attached file and respond accordingly.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Attached are our responses to the comments point-by-point. I hope you will be satisfied with the revision. If there is any other question regarding the revised manuscript, please let me know. Replied as below.
Sincerely yours,
Jianwei Zhang
- Line no. 70: Muhammad et al. (2020): It appears in the text; change it to as per style of the journal.
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see Line 68.
- Line no. 121: The N content in rice straw seems to be on higher side. Usually it varies from 0.4 to 0.75%. Please verify it.
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have verified the data many times that rice straw's nitrogen content is correct. It may be that our study uses a high N fertilization rate (198-300kg/hm2) and increases panicle fertilizer rate.
- Line no. 142: It should be yield components not compounds.
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see Line 142.
- Line no. 174: t hm-2 , Please clarify the units.
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion.We have clarified the units. Please see Line 174.
- Fig 2: On y-axis, what is meterological of yield.
Authors' reply: In previous studies, in order to better reveal the primary meteorological factors affecting major grain yield, grain yield is separated into three parts: trend yield, meteorological yield and random noise. The trend yield indicates the agricultural technology management level and represents various investments on grain yield, while the meteorological yield explains the influences of weather changes on grain yield, and the random noise shows the accidental factors on grain yield. Usually, the random noise is negligence for its no rules. Thus, the grain yield can be described with the trend yield and the meteorological yield (Zhang J. et al. (2014). Research on the Relationships Between Rainfall and Meteorological Yield in Irrigation District. Water Resources Management 28(6): 1689-1702. DIO:10.1007/s11269-014-0577-3).
Reviewer 2 Report
Overall its a nice piece of work. Introduction is up to date and well written.
Material and Methods section is well explained and experimental design and treatments is logical and useful.
Results are elaborated with the help of data analysis and graphical presentation with all related parameters taken into consideration.
Discussion is logical and supported with relevant citations.
Conclusion is precise, however, some conclusions may be drawn related to parameters studied.
Overall its a nice piece of work, however, few corrections have been highlighted yellow in the file attached.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Attached are our responses to the comments point-by-point. I hope you will be satisfied with the revision. If there is any other question regarding the revised manuscript, please let me know. Replied as below.
Sincerely yours,
Jianwei Zhang
Line 16 Put “?”
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see Line 16.
Line 43 Mhm2?
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have changed to million hm2. Please see line 43.
Line 68, 85 citation format changed here. Uniformity is required
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see Line 68 and 85.
Line 89 language is vague. rewrite please
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified to “reduce the negative effects of extreme weather events by formulating reasonable management measures to stabilize yields”. Please seen 89
Line 99 Correct “was” to “is”
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see line 99.
Line 106 Correct “amount fertilization” to “amount of fertilization”
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see line 110.
Line 76 “explained a third of crop yield”?
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have changed to “explained one-third of crop yield".
Table2 Correct “spikelets per panicle” to “spikelets per spike”
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it in the full text. Please see Table 2.
Line 299 "in this experiment conduction" imprive language
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have delete “conduction”. Please see Line 299.
Line 334 “main”?
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified to “mainly”. Please see Line 334.
Line 452 Correct “panicle” to “spike”
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified it. Please see Line 452.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The manuscript (MS) evaluated “Study on the Nutrient Optimal Management Strategy of High and Stable Annual Yield in the Rice-Wheat System: A 10-Year-Term Experiment”. The theme of this manuscript is within the scope of Agronomy. Generally, it is interesting to the readers and conditionally acceptable for publication. But there are a few points to be improved and clarified. So, I think some minor revisions are needed for this MS. Please consider the comments below for your revision of the MS.
[Abstract]
The conclusion is not related to the objectives and title of this study. The conclusion should be what the researcher wants to say based on the main findings.
[Introduction]
The introduction is perfect. The author could explain how this study is important.
[M & M]
L 108, The author used a completely randomized design in field experiments. Why? This CRD design is most suitable for the homogeneous condition of the experimental area. For example, lab experiments or under control conditions. In the field experiments, a randomized completely block design is more suitable.
L 120, Table 1. the author reduced the amount of fertilizer in RFP and RFP+O. How to reduce it?
[Results and Discussion]
The results and discussion section are good. It is sound good results from 10-years study. The author could explain the results.
[Conclusions]
The conclusion is perfect.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Attached are our responses to the comments point-by-point. I hope you will be satisfied with the revision. If there is any other question regarding the revised manuscript, please let me know. Replied as below.
Sincerely yours,
Jianwei Zhang
1. The conclusion is not related to the objectives and title of this study. The conclusion should be what the researcher wants to say based on the main findings.
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. We have modified that nutrient management to increase and stable the DMA after rice jointing and before wheat jointing could maintain the high and stable annual yield in rice-wheat systems. Please see Line 36.
2. L 108, The author used a completely randomized design in field experiments. Why? This CRD design is most suitable for the homogeneous condition of the experimental area. For example, lab experiments or under control conditions. In the field experiments, a randomized completely block design is more suitable.
Authors' reply: Thanks for your suggestion. “Completely randomized design” was our writing error, our experiment used a randomized completely block design, and it has been modified. Please see Line 108.
3. L 120, Table 1. the author reduced the amount of fertilizer in RFP and RFP+O. How to reduce it?
Authors' reply: The amount of N, P and K fertilizers In the treatment of RFP and RFP+O were reduced by 34%, 20%, and 25%, respectively, at the rice season, and 25%, 17%and 14%, respectively, at the wheat season, compared with CF. The amount of fertilizer applied by RFP adopts the method recommended by experts to achieve a high fertilizer utilization rate without reducing yield.
