Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

General:

This paper is nicely drafted and easy to read.

Abstract:

Please clearly mention the hypothesis, objective, and end abstract with future implications of this study.

Introduction:

Please have a detailed introduction and cite the latest references. The introduction should end with future implications after the objectives.

Results:

The results section is nicely written. Please check references carefully            

Discussion:

I would suggest the authors have a more supported discussion with references considering the main point: The limitations of the method and considerations when to apply the studied methodology and then the potential next steps or further investigation to address these limitations.

References: Please double-check the style of references and if missing one

Minor English correction is required

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article dealt with some useful information on analyzing the reason for wheat yield gap in Hubei province, and this study also tried to quantify/ identify the gaps as well. The followings are the suggestion to improve this article:

1. L 48-50:  Use the following reference in support of the statement: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104761

2. What was the knowledge gap that encouraged the authors to conduct this study?

3. L 74-75: Only the availability of a good report was the need for this study!

4. Methodology part is well-written and clear to understand.

5. The authors used some innovative and appropriate analytical tools to identify the yield gap. However, a thorough description of those tools must be there in the methodology or the authors may provide that information in the supplementary file as well.

6. Conclusion part must be written as per the objectives of the study. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx