Porous Minerals Improve Wheat Shoot Growth and Grain Yield through Affecting Soil Properties and Microbial Community in Coastal Saline Land

General comments

The manuscript, presenting the results of the study of the effect of porous minerals addition in coastal saline soils of China on the wheat shoot growth and grain yield in undoubtedly interesting for the audience of Agronomy. However, the article cannot be published in its current form. I recommend the Journal to publish the article after major revision.

Line #

Original

Comment/suggestion

Major comments

Abstract

This section lacks conclusion about which of the minerals works better, at least for the soil and crop studied. The reader expects such conclusion after explicit indication of the mineral amendments used. Besides that, the mentioning of microorganisms by all means should be specific about the methods. I strongly recommend to amend the abstract.

Keywords

Providing “Microorganism” as a keyword is not productive at all; I strongly suggest to substitute it with something more specific, like “16S metabarcoding” or some such.

The keyword “porous mineral” is mentioned in the abstract already, and therefore repeating it as a keyword narrows the search potential for the article, instead of broadening it; I strongly recommend to substitute it with this end in mind.

Methods, 2.4

This subsection is brief and should be amended. What about the mock communities? Were the indicated species found? What version of the RDP database was used?

Results, 4.4

This subsection is poorly written and should be rewritten.

Discussion

This section, mostly merely repeating the results, does not provide a comprehensive discussion of the obtained results and hence should be adequately amended.

28-29

However, the mechanism of porous minerals improving the salt resistance of grain crops in coastal saline soils is still unclear.

And after this study those mechanisms are nonetheless unclear! The is no result in the study pointing at the factual mechanisms: all mechanisms, if any could be deduced, are tentative or speculative.

33, elsewhere

fresh weight

Strictly speaking, the correct term is fresh mass. Substitute, please.

35, 36

increased soil fertility in both the rhizosphere and non-rhizosphere

I wonder, how you understand the meaning of the term soil fertility. The rhizosphere soil does not possess any fertility separately from the non-rhizosphere soil. But, of course, it may have properties, beneficial for plant growth and development. Correct, please.

438

we examined the fertility of rhizospheric and non-rhizospheric soil.

211, elsewhere throughout the manuscript

18.00%, 20.50%, 26.45%

Too many decimals, not justified by detection limits or such. The decimals distract readers’ attention by increasing the visual cumbersomeness of the text. I insist on either rounding up completely (better!) or decrease to one decimal at least.

355-385

The paragraphs are poorly comprehensible; they should be rewritten in a simple and readable manner. Besides, the format of the numbers should be consistent. Let me also remind you of the universal rule about not more than three figures preceding “respectively”. It is in your interest as the authors to facilitate the adequate perception of your results by adequately presenting them with such end in mind.

477-480

The positive relationship between plant fresh weight and 16S gene copy numbers in rhizospheric soil (r = 0.83, P < 0.01) indicated that bacterial community played a dominant role in plant growth compared to fungi (Table S1).

Perhaps, plant input in soil from increased biomass affected bacterial community? Besides, statistically significant correlation cannot be translated into bacterial dominance over fungi. The statement should be corrected.

490-494

The sentence is long and cumbersome. It needs editing.

510-511

The findings in our study will provide an important guidance for salt-affected soil remediation with porous minerals in coastal saline areas.

Conclusion is too short and non-specific. The authors themselves should make explicit conclusions about the amendments used in this study.

Minor comments

46

high salt is a major

High salt where exactly? Should be specified.

61

soil microorganism structure and activity

soil microbial community/assemblage structure and activity

69

microorganisms played an important role

It should be in the Present Simple Tense, i.e. “microorganisms play an important role”, because the statement is the universal truth.

74

the nutrients were exchanged

The same rule, as above, applies here as well; it should be “the nutrients are exchanged”.

Introduction, 92-96

The sentences in these lines belong in the abstract. The introduction should end, according to the genre of the section, with explicit statement of the aim of the study. I am well aware that nowadays increasing often researchers write this part like you did, but am utterly convinced that it is a poor and totally unreasonable practice, which I strongly urge you not to proliferate, especially via such authoritative medium as MDPI.

107

saline and alluvial soils

For the Agronomy journal it would be helpful to provide soil names according to the IUSS WRB.

137, 246

rhizosphere/rhizospheric soil

Please, be consistent with the terms: it either the rhizosphere soil or the rhizospheric one. Most often the former is used, therefore I recommend to use it throughout the manuscript; the more so that the term is used in the graphs.

394-396

A repetitive statement and should be removed: by now a reader is already very well aware what was done and why.

396-399

Once again, the statement is a mere repetition of the results and, as such, is redundant in the section and should be reworded in the way, adequate to the genre of discussion. The same applies elsewhere in the discussion section.

466

greatly affected

Well, the statement seems not very well justified, especially in respect to the physical properties (which I could not find in the main body of the manuscript and was not provided with supplementary material) and hence should be toned down.

508

was probably ascribed

can be ascribed (or occurred most likely due to…)

Technical comments

58

minerals, montmorillonite

minerals, i.e. montmorillonite

132, 447, elsewhere

plant heights and fresh weights

plant height and fresh mass

138

In concrete,

Specifically,

247

on soil property

on soil properties

276-278

“Soil pH… investigated”.

The text is repetitive and thus redundant; remove, please.

292-294

“K+/Na+ ratio… investigated”.

The text is repetitive and thus redundant; remove, please.

331-335

The sentence is too cumbersome and thus poorly perceived; rewrite, please.

444

thus enhanced

thus enhancing

References

The references do not follow the MDPI style in formatting, but I understand that it is acceptable at the reviewing stage.