Improvement of Climate Resource Utilization Efficiency to Enhance Maize Yield through Adjusting Planting Density

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript had studied the effect of different planting densities on the maize yield and climate resource utilization efficiency. This research was of significance for sustainable agriculture. In my opinion, this manuscript is well organized and relatively comprehensively described. Some of the specific suggestions and comments are shown below:

1. Line 117-123：It is suggested to supplement the soil types of two sites.

2. Line 138-141：Fertilizer application expression is not clear, which should use the application of pure nutrient component. Now more confused, phosphorus potassium fertilizer only describes the amount of fertilizer, but do not know its nutrient content, including potassium sulfate.

3. Line 150-154: This standard is not accurate. Should it be GB/T 1353-2018？

4. Line 155-157: Is the formula (1) right? Please check the formula.

5. Line 165: Did the DMA at the maturity stage include the grain ear? Please check all the formulas in this manuscript.

6. Line 223-224: Is there significant difference between them? If they are not significant different, it should not be described like this. Please check all the descriptions like this in this manuscript.

7. Line 271-275: There are no err bars in Figure 3, can you supplement them?

8. Line 276: Why are the treatments different in different years in Table 6? Why are there no significance analyses in Table 6?

9. Line 441-445: This manuscript had not study maize hybrid varieties, is this description appropriate?

10. Line 450-463: It is suggested to further summarize and generalize the conclusion of this manuscript around the research objectives.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

I find the manuscript presented to me for review Improvement of climate resource utilization efficiency to enhance maize yield through adjusting planting density containing field studies very timely and necessary in the context of ongoing climate change.

Overall I think the manuscript is well written. It contains a good elaboration of the results of the research obtained and a good discussion of the results obtained.

I have few suggestions when it comes to the text of the manuscript:

Line 76-77 I suggest clarifying what management the authors have in mind

Line 81-83 Although not relevant to this work, the effect of resource availability primarily N on yield should be mentioned

Line 85 - 88 difficult to compare I suggest giving the same unit % or t ha-1

Line 100 no reference [xx]

Line 102 clarify the threshold value

Line 105 - 107 I suggest adding the phrase "and to provide guidance/direction for research in other areas of the world"

Line 123 (Table 1) I understand that these are average values, for such an extensive period of study I suggest providing these parameters by year of study as the abundance may have changed significantly

Line 130-132 clarify which multi-resistant

Line 142-143 In what way? Was chemical protection applied? Clarify

Line 207 MS Excel 2016 (Redmond, WA,USA) I think this is what the authors had in mind

Line 392 specify what resources

Line 423 - 424 "In the uture, heat waves will become more frequent, longer and more intense." reference should be added

Suggest adding more references to world corn production, as it stands the study focuses on one region of the world. I think it would be appropriate to relate the results of the study to studies obtained by other researchers from other regions of the world where climate change is also occurring. I also suggest in the final summary to add a suggestion for further research in other regions that could improve yields. 

Perhaps the authors have photographs of their research, I think the extreme positions would make an interesting addition to the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf