Effect of Lycium barbarum L. Root Restriction Cultivation Method on Plant Growth and Soil Bacterial Community Abundance
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I have completed the review of the article:
The effect of root-restriction cultivation methods on the growth of Lycium barbarum L. and the bacterial communities in the rhizosphere soil. It is an interesting study in the context of the root-restriction cultivation method. The manuscript includes good results. The results are quite clearly presented. However, a few things need to be corrected or explained
1- The citation of references in the manuscript is not met the instruction of the Agronomy journal
2- The study was carried out during only one season, it must be two seasons
3- Please improve the discussion
4- Burnes et al (2015), Burnes et al (2016) and Wang et al (2016) are not listed in the references section
5- The following references are listed in the references section but the authors did not use these references in the manuscript.
ü Akter S, Lee SY, Moon SK, Choi C, Huq MA (2021) Sphingomonas horti sp. nov. a novel bacterial species 415 isolated from soil of a tomato garden. Archives of Microbiology 203 (2)
ü Campostrini E, Yamanishi OK, Maldonado JF, Marin SLD (2002) INFLUENCE OF ROOT RESTRICTION ON CHLOROPHYLL AND CAROTENOIDS CONCENTRATIONS IN LEAVES OF FOUR PAPAYA (Carica papaya L.) GENOTYPES 36:1-6
ü Huber KJ, Geppert AM, Wanner G, Fsel BU, Wst PK, Overmann J (2016) The first representative of the globally widespread subdivision 6 Acidobacteria, Vicinamibacter silvestris gen. nov. sp nov. isolated from subtropical savannah soil. International Journal of Systematic & Evolutionary Microbiology 66 (8):2971
ü Leng F, Duan SY, Song SR, Zhao LP Comparative Metabolic Profiling of Grape Pulp during the Growth Process Reveals Systematic Influences under Root Restriction. Metabolites 11 (6):377
ü PENELOPE., CHRISTENSEN., F., D., COOK. (1978) Lysobacter, a New Genus of Nonfruiting, Gliding 450 Bacteria with a High Base Ratio[J]. , 1978, 28(3):367-393. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 28 (3):367-393
ü Wu YS, Li B, Li XY, Zhang WW, Duan SY, Wang SP (2021) Regulatory effect of root restriction on aroma quality of Red Alexandria grape. Food Chemistry 372
ü Zeng Y, Selyanin V, Lukeŝ M, Dean J, Kaftan D, Feng F, Koblížek M (2015) Characterization of the microaerophilic, bacteriochlorophyll a-containing bacterium Gemmatimonas phototrophica sp. nov. and emended descriptions of the genus Gemmatimonas and Gemmatimonas aurantiaca. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 65 (8):2410-2419
6- The reference section must be reviewed by the authors
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: The citation of references in the manuscript is not met the instruction of the Agronomy journal.
Response 1: Thanks for your valuable comments of this manuscript. According to your suggestion, we have changed the citation of references in the manuscript to met the Agronomy journal.
Point 2: The study was carried out during only one season, it must be two seasons.
Response 2: We really appreciate this helpful comment and agree that two and more seasons may be more meaningful. As noted above the major revisions content, the experiment has been carried out for 3 years, only this year has a stable fruit yield, and this part has also been added, what’s more, the factors related to plant growth were all completed on the basis of 3 years of research.
Point 3: Please improve the discussion.
Response 3: We thank the reviewer for this useful comment and have added other two tables (Table 2 and Table 3) and one figure (Figure 3) to support and validate the discussion. In the discussion part, through analysis, the relation of leaf N, P and K and soil N, P and K content and effect of leaves' nutrition, yield, fruit's quality of wolfberry with different root restriction treatments.
Point 4: Burnes et al (2015), Burnes et al (2016) and Wang et al (2016) are not listed in the references section.
Response 4: Thanks. We appreciate the positive feedback from the reviewer. As suggested, we have modified that term from the manuscript throughout the references section.
Point 5: The following references are listed in the references section but the authors did not use these references in the manuscript.
ü Akter S, Lee SY, Moon SK, Choi C, Huq MA (2021) Sphingomonas horti sp. nov. a novel bacterial species 415 isolated from soil of a tomato garden. Archives of Microbiology 203 (2)
ü Campostrini E, Yamanishi OK, Maldonado JF, Marin SLD (2002) INFLUENCE OF ROOT RESTRICTION ON CHLOROPHYLL AND CAROTENOIDS CONCENTRATIONS IN LEAVES OF FOUR PAPAYA (Carica papaya L.) GENOTYPES 36:1-6
ü Huber KJ, Geppert AM, Wanner G, Fsel BU, Wst PK, Overmann J (2016) The first representative of the globally widespread subdivision 6 Acidobacteria, Vicinamibacter silvestris gen. nov. sp nov. isolated from subtropical savannah soil. International Journal of Systematic & Evolutionary Microbiology 66 (8):2971
ü Leng F, Duan SY, Song SR, Zhao LP Comparative Metabolic Profiling of Grape Pulp during the Growth Process Reveals Systematic Influences under Root Restriction. Metabolites 11 (6):377
ü PENELOPE., CHRISTENSEN., F., D., COOK. (1978) Lysobacter, a New Genus of Nonfruiting, Gliding 450 Bacteria with a High Base Ratio[J]. , 1978, 28(3):367-393. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 28 (3):367-393
ü Wu YS, Li B, Li XY, Zhang WW, Duan SY, Wang SP (2021) Regulatory effect of root restriction on aroma quality of Red Alexandria grape. Food Chemistry 372
ü Zeng Y, Selyanin V, Lukeŝ M, Dean J, Kaftan D, Feng F, Koblížek M (2015) Characterization of the microaerophilic, bacteriochlorophyll a-containing bacterium Gemmatimonas phototrophica sp. nov. and emended descriptions of the genus Gemmatimonas and Gemmatimonas aurantiaca. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 65 (8):2410-2419
Response 5: Thanks. We appreciate the positive feedback from the reviewer. As suggested, we have removed that term from the manuscript throughout.
Point 6: The reference section must be reviewed by the authors.
Response 6: Thank you very much for your comment. According to your suggestion, all the authors improved and modified the reference section in their areas of ability to revise the manuscript thoroughly.
NOTE: All changes in the article are marked in green and yellow.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Although the article seems interesting, I am unable to perform a thorough substantive evaluation as the manuscript does not meet the basic criteria required for Agronomy. Please edit the text carefully including figures and tables (see: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy/instructions#figures)
regards and good luck
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: Although the article seems interesting, I am unable to perform a thorough substantive evaluation as the manuscript does not meet the basic criteria required for Agronomy. Please edit the text carefully including figures and tables
(see: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy/instructions#figures).
Response 1: Thank you very much for your comment, and accordingly, we have changed the citation of references in the manuscript to met the Agronomy journal, with all the authors improved and modified the reference section in their areas of ability to revise the manuscript thoroughly. We have added other two tables (Table 2 and Table 3) and one figure (Figure 3) to support and validate the discussion. We have added and modified the result, discussion, conclusions and have included the more recent relevant literature on this topic in the revised manuscript. What’s more, we even invited native English speakers to enhance the language of our essay.
NOTE: All changes in the article are marked in green and yellow.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Review of the manuscript:
The effect of root-restriction cultivation methods on the growth of Lycium barbarum L. and the bacterial communities in the rhizosphere soil.
The paper presents research on the impact of root restriction treatments on the growth and development of L. barbarum. The paper fits into the theme of the Section “Innovative Cropping Systems, Special Issue “Effects of Tillage, Cover Crop and Crop Rotation on Soil” however, it particularly emphasize the occurrence of microorganisms in the soil in the root zone of Lycium barbarum L.
The topic of manuscript fits the aims and scope of the Agronomy Journal.
In my opinion, the manuscript should be corrected before its publication.
Detailed remarks
Title
I propose to change the title of the work on:
Effect of Lycium barbarum L. root restriction cultivation method on plant growth and soil bacterial communities abundance
Introduction
Lines 72- 75 - goals.
In my opinion the most effective width of root-restriction cultivation will not allow a full assessment of the effects of applied cultivation method if the wolfberries yields and chemical composition are not analysed. No such analyses were carried out in this work.
Results and Analyses
Lines 202-204. What was the effect of fertilization (applied decomposed sheep manure) on the increase in the content of N, P and K in leaves of all treatments?
Lines 241, 247, 251, 253. Insert a space between the word “Figure” and the number of the figure.
Line 283:
Is: In addition, The soil
Should be: In addition, the soil
Line 288 should be: Chryseolinea at
Line 308:
Is: x60
Should be:X60
Line 327: There was stated that: “Our results showed that restricting root growth could reduce the N, P, and K uptake by the roots so more nutrients could be transported to the aboveground portion, ”
Do the results confirm that there has been a reduction in the uptake of N, P, and K by the roots? Have root biomass and elements uptake with root yield been studied? Please explain.
Conclusion
Line 382: Please remove one “the” in: “…the the crown…”
References
425-427, 466, 476: Please format your references.
Figures
Line 545, Figure 3. The title of the figure states: ”The N, P, K content and N:P ratio in L. barbarum leaves…”, while on the graph: “soil nutrient (mg/g)”. Do the values quoted therefore refer to the elements content in the plant or in the soil? What is the reason for such a high content of nitrogen in the leaves of L. barbarum? (If the nitrogen quantities in quoted refer to the leaves).
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Point 1: Title
I propose to change the title of the work on:
Effect of Lycium barbarum L. root restriction cultivation method on plant growth and soil bacterial communities abundance.
Response 1: Thanks for your valuable comments of this manuscript. According to your suggestion, we have changed the title of the work on:
Effect of Lycium barbarum L. root restriction cultivation method on plant growth and soil bacterial communities abundance.
Point 2: Introduction
Lines 72- 75 - goals.
In my opinion the most effective width of root-restriction cultivation will not allow a full assessment of the effects of applied cultivation method if the wolfberries yields and chemical composition are not analysed. No such analyses were carried out in this work.
Response 2: We are grateful for this comment as it points to an important feature of this study. As suggested, we added the wolfberries yields and chemical composition and as well as these method. Based on this result, we performed a correlation analysis of different plant growth indicators in all treatment. This resulted have add to the reviewed manuscript as an independent section titled “Yield and fruit quality of L. barbarum under different root-restriction widths”.
Point 3: Results and Analyses
Lines 202-204. What was the effect of fertilization (applied decomposed sheep manure) on the increase in the content of N, P and K in leaves of all treatments?
Lines 241, 247, 251, 253. Insert a space between the word “Figure” and the number of the figure.
Line 283:
Is: In addition, The soil
Should be: In addition, the soil
Line 288 should be: Chryseolinea at
Line 308:
Is: x60
Should be:X60
Line 327: There was stated that: “Our results showed that restricting root growth could reduce the N, P, and K uptake by the roots so more nutrients could be transported to the aboveground portion, ”
Do the results confirm that there has been a reduction in the uptake of N, P, and K by the roots? Have root biomass and elements uptake with root yield been studied? Please explain.
Response 3: Thanks. We agree with your suggestion that it’s important to consider the soil fertility level. We want to emphasize the effect of root-restriction cultivation methods on soil fertility studies, Therefore, the level of fertilization in treatments and controls is exactly the same. In addition, I also added a detailed analysis of Soil Physicochemical Properties in this paper, which can confirm that root-restriction cultivation methods promotes the absorption and utilization of soil nutrients by roots and promotes the delivery of more nutrients to plants. But root biomass of this test we really didn't test, but it’s really important suggests for further research. The other comments, as suggested, we have modified.
Point 4: Conclusion
Line 382: Please remove one “the” in: “…the the crown…”
Response 4: Thanks, as suggested, we have modified.
Point 5: References
425-427, 466, 476: Please format your references.
Response 5: Thanks, follow your advice, we have formated there references and also checked all references relevant to the contents.
Point 6: Figures
Line 545, Figure 3. The title of the figure states: ”The N, P, K content and N:P ratio in L. barbarum leaves…”, while on the graph: “soil nutrient (mg/g)”. Do the values quoted therefore refer to the elements content in the plant or in the soil? What is the reason for such a high content of nitrogen in the leaves of L. barbarum? (If the nitrogen quantities in quoted refer to the leaves).
Response 6: Thank you very much. We really appreciate this helpful comment and It was really my fault. I'm very sorry for the mistake. One of axis titles of “soil nutrient (mg/g)” should be “Leaf nutrient (mg/g)” and another should be “Leaf N:P ratio”. In addition, I guarantee that the data is true and reliable. Moreover, Treatments and controls were performed at the same levels, including fertilization levels, and the only difference between them is root-restriction cultivation methods. Therefore, we believe that root-restriction caused high content of nitrogen in the leaves of L. barbarum. What is more, our measurements were taken in early June which is the budding and flowering season, and It is beneficial for later delivery of more nutrients to the fruit.
NOTE: All changes in the article are marked in green and yellow.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authos,
As I mentioned earlier, the article is very interesting. In general, I have no comments on the merits. However, there is again an error: why are both tables and figures not inserted into the main text but placed at the end of the manuscript? In the instructions to authors it clearly states "All Figures, Schemes and Tables should be inserted into the main text close to their first citation" (see: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy/instructions#figures). In Response 1, the Authors mentioned all merit improvementes (which increased the scientific value of the article) and the correction of errors in the citation of references, while the tables and figures were not inserted correctly. The lack of figures and tables in the main text is a crucial error that disqualifies a peer-reviewed article.
Therefore, the article can be accepted for publication, but only after tables and graphs have been inserted in the main text.
Regards
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks for your valuable comments of this manuscript. According to your suggestion, we have inserted both tables and figures into the main text to met the Agronomy journal.
Thanks again for you kind help.
Kind regards,
Lizhen Zhu
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
