Effects of Water Supply Mode on Nitrogen Transformation and Ammonia Oxidation Microorganisms in a Tea Garden
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
General comment
The article is a bit confusion, please reconsider to write and add more details on the material and methods section as well as improving the way of presenting the results. Too many information in the same figures is not understandable and somehow create confusion in the results you are bringing.
Specific comments
Introduction
1. L60: Ecological studies have instead of havd
2. L68: Although a large number of studies have been instead of havd
1 Materials and methods
2. L 99: Better to use for the first time in L89 the full meaning of WHC standing for water holding capacity and in brackets the abbreviation and the following times you can just abbreviate.
For all tables and figures better to add the information of the meaning of the treatments. Example: T20Oct: xxxxx; T20Ace: xxxxx
Fig 2: Is the time in (h) or (d) as you presented in the test as well in fig 1?
Fig 3: In y axis there is no need in each value to add % since you already presented the unit in brackets.
Question: Is the study conducted as incubation experiment or in a tea garden?
f
Author Response
Point 1: L60: Ecological studies have instead of havd
Response 1: This part was modified as: Furthermore, ecological studies have shown that….. (in red)
Point 2: L68: Although a large number of studies have been instead of havd
Response 2: This part was modified as: Although a large number of studies have been conducted on soil nitrogen transformation in tea gardens (in red)
Point 3: L99: Better to use for the first time in L89 the full meaning of WHC standing for water holding capacity and in brackets the abbreviation and the following times you can just abbreviate.
Response 3: The soil water content was maintained at 20% of the maximum water holding capacity (WHC) by natural drying prior to bottling the samples (in red)
Point 4: For all tables and figures better to add the information of the meaning of the treatments. Example: T20Oct: xxxxx; T20Ace: xxxxx
Response 4: The information has been added to all tables and figures (in red)
Point 5: Fig 2: Is the time in (h) or (d) as you presented in the test as well in fig 1?
Response 5: It has been modified in the figure.
Point 6: Fig 3: In y axis there is no need in each value to add % since you already presented the unit in brackets
Response 6: It has been modified in the figure.
Point 7: Question: Is the study conducted as incubation experiment or in a tea garden?
Response 7: The study is as an incubation experiment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Brief summary
This manuscript describes the effect of water supply on soil nitrogen transformation. It is suitable for publication in Agronomy.
Broad comments
The manuscript is worthy, in general is well written with only a few minor errors. I think that authors should define better the treatments. In the materials and methods section, the statistical analysis is missing (correlation and multivariate).
Some specific comments
L85. Please add ‘a’ before ‘sandy’.
L274. ‘wa’
L292. Please add the number of the reference
L317: Please add the number of the reference
L398. See reference format.
Author Response
Point 1: L85. Please add ‘a’ before ‘sandy’.
Response 1: This part was modified as: which contained a sandy loam soil (in red)
Point 2: ‘wa’
Response 2: This part was modified as: was (in red)
Point 3: L292. Please add the number of the reference
Response 3: The reference has been added (in red).
Point 4: L317: Please add the number of the reference
Response 4: This part has been marked by references
Point 5: L398. See reference format
Response 5: References have been revised (in red).
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This article is well conceived and well carried out, becoming a good reading, if the readers are familiar not only with soil chemistry and soil microbiology, but also with biochemestry processes taking place within the soil. I congratulate the authors for the article's scientific quality.
Author Response
The content of the article has been partially modified
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
It was a pleasure revising your manuscript. Its not easy to conduct this kind of study and I know you made a tremendous effort to get these results. I think your manuscript is well written.
Abstract: Your abstract provided to your audience a clear summary of your study, methods, results, and conclusions.
Introduction: The introduction of this manuscript conveys the basic information to the readers without obligating us to investigate previous publications and provided clues as to the gaps addressed by the present study.
Material and Methods; This section allows us to reproduce the study and the way that the data was analyzed is clear.
Discussions: The authors have interpreted and described the significance of their findings in relation to what was already known about the research problem being investigated and explained any new understanding or insights that emerged as a result of their research.
Conclusion: the conclusions are clear, they could be supplemented by but this is only a recommendation.
I appreciate the references used. Most of them are very actual. Once again I congratulate the author for this I study and I look forward to read the revised version.
Cordially,
Author Response
The content of the article has been partially modified
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
