Effect of Intercropping and Bio-Fertilizer Application on the Nutrient Uptake and Productivity of Mung Bean and Marjoram

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

In my opinion the theme of the article is very actual and interesting for the readers of the journal.

 

The authors showed that in the cultivation of medicinal and aromatic plants, massive application of chemical fertilizers decrease the bioactive compounds of these plant which lead to decreasing the essence quantity and quality.

 

The results of the study demonstrated that the implementation of sustainable strategy along with application of biofertilizers improved essence content and quality by increasing the major essence compositions of marjoram such as carvacrol, gamma-terpinene, p-cymene and carvacrol methyl ether.

 

Another important result showed that the total productivity (calculated by the maximum land equivalent 23 ratio index) in all intercrop patterns was higher than 1 represent the advantage of mentioned cropping patterns in comparison with plants monocropping.

 

This research concluded that the application of biofertilizers in intercrop ratio of O/45MB could be suggested to farmers for improving essence quantity and quality of marjoram plant.

 

The paper is well structured, the title and abstract clearly describe the content of the manuscript, and the language is correct and clear. I have some questions and suggestions in the attached file.

In my opinion no revision is needed.

Best regards

Author Response

Dear Editor in Chief, Journal of Land (MDPI)

 

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of manuscript number ‘land-1974032’ for publication in the Journal of Land (MDPI). We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on the manuscript. We have carefully reviewed the comments and revised the manuscript accordingly (changes highlighted in the revised manuscript). Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to the Editor’s and reviewers’ comments.

 

# Reviewer 1

In my opinion the theme of the article is very actual and interesting for the readers of the journal. The authors showed that in the cultivation of medicinal and aromatic plants, massive application of chemical fertilizers decrease the bioactive compounds of these plant which lead to decreasing the essence quantity and quality. The results of the study demonstrated that the implementation of sustainable strategy along with application of biofertilizers improved essence content and quality by increasing the major essence compositions of marjoram such as carvacrol, gamma-terpinene, p-cymene and carvacrol methyl ether. Another important result showed that the total productivity (calculated by the maximum land equivalent 23 ratio index) in all intercrop patterns was higher than 1 represent the advantage of mentioned cropping patterns in comparison with plants monocropping. This research concluded that the application of biofertilizers in intercrop ratio of O/45MB could be suggested to farmers for improving essence quantity and quality of marjoram plant. The paper is well structured, the title and abstract clearly describe the content of the manuscript, and the language is correct and clear. I have some questions and suggestions in the attached file.

In my opinion no revision is needed.

OUR REPLY: We thank the reviewer for their positive and encouraging comments.

 

On the above, we would be grateful if you would consider our manuscript to be published in the Journal of Land (MDPI).

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Authors

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper needs more revisions, and you  should revise the language writing. There are some words written wrongly

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editor in Chief, Journal of Land (MDPI)

 

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of manuscript number ‘land-1974032’ for publication in the Journal of Land (MDPI). We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on the manuscript. We have carefully reviewed the comments and revised the manuscript accordingly (changes highlighted in the revised manuscript). Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to the Editor’s and reviewers’ comments.

# Reviewer 2

This paper has a very good subject as it studied how to the productivity, essence quantity and quality of marjoram plant under low-input conditions different cropping patterns (monocropping of marjoram and mung bean and different intercrop ratios of both plants) and inoculation with biofertilizers (arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and N, P and K solubilizing bacteria).

OUR REPLY: We thank the reviewer for their positive and encouraging comments.

Title

• I do not think that your title is suitable (Improving essence quality and land use efficiency: A case study of marjoram and mung bean in intercropping system) you did not show in your result how the land efficiency was improved, also you focused on essence quantity not essence quality. I suggest your title to be (Evaluation the effect of intercropping and bio-fertilizer application on the nutrient uptake, productivity and yield of mung bean and marjoram) or something like this.

OUR REPLY:  The title was changed based on the reviewer comments.

Methodology

• To determine the physical and chemical properties of the soil, it was sampled from the depth of 0-30 cm before the onset of the experiment and was sent to the soil science laboratory) how many sample did you take for every treatment? And how you choose to take it.

OUR REPLY: Before planting, soil samples (0–30 cm in depth) were taken. Three subsamples were taken from the trial field prior to planting using an auger in a zigzag manner. Then, one composite soil sample was prepared from the subsample. The soil samples were air dried and ground to pass through a 2.0 mm sieve before laboratory analysis. From the sample, the following parameters were analyzed.

• I could not understand your treatment they are very confused. Please number the treatment to be clear such as: (The treatments included different cropping patterns contain (1) mung bean monocropping (MBm), (2) marjoram monocropping (Om), and additive intercropping ratios of 3) 100% marjoram+ 15% mung bean (O/15MB), (4) 100% marjoram+ 30% mung bean (O/30MB), (5) 100% marjoram+ 45% mung bean (O/45MB), (6) 100% marjoram+ 60% mung bean (O/60MB).

OUR REPLY: The corrections were made.

• Line 120-124: Are all these components were used as one mixed component or what? Did this component was apply to every single experiment of the above mentioned experiments? Please make this very clear and let the readers understand this very easily.

OUR REPLY: Yes. In this study, the second factor include two levels: non-application of biofertilizer and application of biofertilizers (Mixed together: AMF+ bacteria fertilizer). We revised this section based on the reviewer comment.

• Line 124-126: (Each plot was composed of 10 rows of marjoram and mung bean with an inter-row spacing of 40 cm. The plots were 3 × 2.5 m spaced by 1 m.) how could this be? 9 spaces × 40 cm = 360 cm, whereas your plot was 3 × 2.5 m. Please explain.

OUR REPLY: The corrections were made

• (Before harvesting, the canopy diameter was measured in five plants of each plat). You mean each plot, please make a correction.

OUR REPLY: Done.

• Please define all abbreviations in a separate section.

OUR REPLY: The list of abbreviations was added at the end of manuscript.

• (The essence of mung bean was extracted by the water distillation method using a Clevenger) please show how many samples you used for this factor, and what was the weight of each sample.

OUR REPLY: We added the method in the text: ‘For this purpose, 30 g of the aerial parts of marjoram were poured into the Clevenger and were added with 300 mL of distilled water. The essential oil extraction was performed at water boiling temperature for 3 hours.’

• (After extraction of lemon balm essences, the required amount of sodium sulfate was added in samples and kept in a refrigerator (4°C) in darkness for chemical analysis) please show these chemical analysis and how did you do it?

OUR REPLY: After extracting the essential oil, we separate the essential oil and water (the weight of marjoram essential oil is lighter than water, it is placed on water). Then we add 25% of the volume weight of essential oil to dry sodium sulfate. Later, we put it in a centrifuge to completely separate the essential oil from the water. Finally, after centrifuging, we pour the essential oil into the vial and keep it at 4 °C in the refrigerator until the essential oil is injected into the GC.

• How did you determine the content of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium. Please show the method, the number of samples you took for each plot.

OUR REPLY: The nutrient analysis methods were added to text: ‘The nutrient concentration of two plants including N, P and K was calculated based on the Kjeldahl method, flame photometry and yellow method (using a spectrophotometer at 470 nm), respectively.’

Results

• Figure 1. Make the presentation of Potassium content as the same as the figures of Nitrogen and Phosphorus content, by putting the result of No-fertilizer to the left and Bio-fertilizer to the right. It is better to follow the same pattern in your presentation so it would easy to read and understood.

OUR REPLY: Thanks for voluble comment. Based on the analysis of variance results, the main effects of experimental factors had a significant impact on the N and P content of marjoram plant and the interaction of experimental factors had not significant impact of two mentioned traits. Therefore, the results of experimental factors in nitrogen and phosphorus are expressed separately.

In contrast, the interaction effects of cropping pattern × fertilizer had significant impact on the K concentration of marjoram plant.

• This need explaining, why mono-cropping system increased canopy diameter and Dry matter yield (DMY) while intercropping decreased them.

OUR REPLY: Thanks for voluble comment. We explain in discussion section why dry matter yield and yield component enhanced in monocropping. The results of study exhibited that the agronomic traits, dry yield of marjoram and al-so seed yield of mung bean was obtained in monocropping condition. The higher productivity in the plants monoculture was attributed to homogeneous environment under monoculture systems and also to the higher inter-specific competition in intercropping pat-terns compared with the intraspecific competition in monoculture [20].  In contrast, the total plants productivity which calculated by LER index in all intercrop patterns was higher than both plants monocropping. The higher LER in intercrops indicates an in-crease in productivity in these cropping patterns in comparison with monocropping which lead to increasing diversity, stability and sustainability as well as reducing production risk in agricultural systems [19].

• Lines 240 to 242: (Also, the lowest content of three mentioned compositions was observed in marjoram monocropping with fertilization). Table 3. Shows that the lowest content of three mentioned compositions was observed in marjoram monocropping without fertilization, please revise.

OUR REPLY:  Done.

• Lines 257 to 259: (Based on the interaction of cropping patterns × fertilizer, the maximum N (3.83%), P (0.29%) and K (1.9%) content of mung bean was obtained in intercrop of O/45MB following biofertilizer application). Unfortunately your Figure 5. Don’t tell that, for me the maximum Phosphorus was in intercrop of O/30 MB following biofertilizer application). Please revise.

OUR REPLY: This section was fully revised.

• Line 262: (when compared with no-fertilizer (Figs. A-C), name the figure by their numbers.

OUR REPLY: Done.

• (The number of pods per plant-1), Lines 283 & 284: (Seeds per pod-1). When you use (per) you do not need to put (-1), you could use it if you do not put per such as (pods plant-1) instead of pods/plant or ( seeds pod-1) instead of seeds/pod.

OUR REPLY: The corrections were made.

• What you mentioned in third paragraph in discussion from Lines 280 to 281 that the decreasing of yield in the intercropping system is due to the decreasing of the density due to occupancy of the cultivated area by companion plants the higher interspecific competition between companion plants affects the partial plant’s productivity in comparison with monoculture conditions. This is true just for the yield that was determined by area kg/ha, but your result indicated that mono-cropping system produced pods per plant and seeds per pod higher than that of intercropping system as in Lines 280 to 281: (Among different cropping patterns, the highest number of pods per plant-1 (28.98 number) was belonged to mung bean mono-cropping) and in Lines 284 to 285: (Among different cropping patterns, the highest number of Seeds per pod-1 (9.21 number) was achieved in mung bean mono-cropping).

OUR REPLY: Thanks for voluble comment. We explain in discussion section why dry matter yield and yield component enhanced in monocropping. The results of study exhibited that the agronomic traits, dry yield of marjoram and al-so seed yield of mung bean was obtained in monocropping condition. The higher productivity in the plants monoculture was attributed to homogeneous environment under monoculture systems and also to the higher inter-specific competition in intercropping pat-terns compared with the intraspecific competition in monoculture [20].  In contrast, the total plants productivity which calculated by LER index in all intercrop patterns was higher than both plants monocropping. The higher LER in intercrops indicates an in-crease in productivity in these cropping patterns in comparison with monocropping which lead to increasing diversity, stability and sustainability as well as reducing production risk in agricultural systems [19].

• (Also, the essence quantity and quality of marjoram improved by biofertilizer application). In your result you showed how the intercropping system and biofertilizer application affect the quantity of the essence, but you did not show how they affect the essence quality of marjoram. Please explain and revise.

OUR REPLY:  The essential oil quality of medicinal and aromatic plant depends on the main essential oil constituents of these plants. In this study the main essential oil constituents such as carvacrol, gamma-terpinene, p-cymene and carvacrol methyl ether enhanced in intercrop patterns following application of biofertilizers. It seems that the higher environmental use efficiency such as water, nutrients, radiation and etc. and also enhancing the N accessibility through biological nitrogen fixation in legume specie (mung bean) and direct or indirect transmission to companion plants (marjoram) improved plant performance and photosynthesis rate which play an important role in increasing essence precursor compounds and also intermediate compositions such as NADPH, ATP, acetyl-CoA [18]. Also, the essence quantity and quality of marjoram improved by biofertilizer application. The increasing essence content by application of biofertilizers could be attributed to the role of nutrient accessibility in increasing photosynthesis rate and also development and division of the glandular trichomes, essential oil channels and secretory ducts.

 

On the above, we would be grateful if you would consider our manuscript to be published in the Journal of Land (MDPI).

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Authors

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript “Land-1974032” entitled “Improving essence quality and land use efficiency: A case study of marjoram and mung bean in intercropping system” by Mohammadzadehet al. deals with an interesting subject that investigated how intercropping and bio-fertilizer application impacted the productivity and essence quality of mung bean and marjoram. Treatments were conducted using mung bean monocropping (MBm) and marjoram monocropping (Om), as well as additive intercropping ratios [100% marjoram+ 15% mung bean (O/15MB), 100% marjoram+ 30% mung bean (O/30MB), 100% marjoram+ 45% mung bean (O/45MB), 100% marjoram+ 60% mung bean (O/60MB)], each with/without application of biofertilizers (mycorrhiza fungi and bacteria fertilizer). The results revealed that N, P, and K content in marjoram and mung bean was highest in the intercropped O/30MB and O/45MB. The maximum land equivalent ratio (LER) index (1.6) was recorded for the O/15MB treatment following biofertilizer application, indicating that 59% more area in the monocropping treatment would be required to achieve the same yield as for the intercropping treatments. In addition, the maximum content of carvacrol, p-cymene, and carvacrol methyl ether was obtained for the O/45MB treatment under biofertilizer.

 

For publication in “Land”, the topic and content are appropriate. The subject of the review is interesting and topical, with high scientific and practical importance. The introduction is in accordance with the subject and correctly presented. Numerous scientific articles of recent date and in concordance to the topic of the study were consulted. The methodology of the study was clearly presented, and appropriate to the proposed objectives. The obtained results have been fully analyzed. The scientific literature, to which the reporting was made, is recent and representative in the field. The editing and linguistic quality are good. In addition, it is easy to follow by the reader, the figures and tables give good summaries, and the text editing to a thoughtful conclusion part. However, there are some points that need attention in order for the article to be published. I would like to recommend the publication of this article, and a minor revision is required for the reasons listed below:

 

·      The discussion section must be enhanced. The authors should further refer to previous studies with regard to biofertilizers (arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and N, P and K solubilizing bacteria) and their effect on marjoram and mung bean. For instance, they can include the following papers in order to enrich the discussion section: 

o   Faridvand, S., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Battaglia, M. L., Gitari, H. I., Raza, M. A., & Siddique, K. H. M. (2022). Application of bio and chemical fertilizers improves yield, and essential oil quantity and quality of Moldavian balm (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) intercropped with mung bean (Vigna radiata L.). Food and Energy Security, 11(2), [e319]. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.319

o   Htwe, A.Z.; Moh, S.M.; Soe, K.M.; Moe, K.; Yamakawa, T. Effects of Biofertilizer Produced from Bradyrhizobium and Streptomyces griseoflavus on Plant Growth, Nodulation, Nitrogen Fixation, Nutrient Uptake, and Seed Yield of Mung Bean, Cowpea, and Soybean. Agronomy 2019, 9, 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9020077

·      Figure 8: The quality of the graph is very low and the numbers of the results are blurred. Please fix this problem.

·      Finally, the reviewer recommends the authors will carefully revise the back matter section manuscript according to the “Instructions for authors”.

Author Response

Dear Editor in Chief, Journal of Land (MDPI)

 

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of manuscript number ‘land-1974032’ for publication in the Journal of Land (MDPI). We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on the manuscript. We have carefully reviewed the comments and revised the manuscript accordingly (changes highlighted in the revised manuscript). Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to the Editor’s and reviewers’ comments.

 

Reviewer #3

The manuscript “Land-1974032” entitled “Improving essence quality and land use efficiency: A case study of marjoram and mung bean in intercropping system” by Mohammadzadehet al. deals with an interesting subject that investigated how intercropping and bio-fertilizer application impacted the productivity and essence quality of mung bean and marjoram. Treatments were conducted using mung bean monocropping (MBm) and marjoram monocropping (Om), as well as additive intercropping ratios [100% marjoram+ 15% mung bean (O/15MB), 100% marjoram+ 30% mung bean (O/30MB), 100% marjoram+ 45% mung bean (O/45MB), 100% marjoram+ 60% mung bean (O/60MB)], each with/without application of biofertilizers (mycorrhiza fungi and bacteria fertilizer). The results revealed that N, P, and K content in marjoram and mung bean was highest in the intercropped O/30MB and O/45MB. The maximum land equivalent ratio (LER) index (1.6) was recorded for the O/15MB treatment following biofertilizer application, indicating that 59% more area in the monocropping treatment would be required to achieve the same yield as for the intercropping treatments. In addition, the maximum content of carvacrol, p-cymene, and carvacrol methyl ether was obtained for the O/45MB treatment under biofertilizer.

 

For publication in “Land”, the topic and content are appropriate. The subject of the review is interesting and topical, with high scientific and practical importance. The introduction is in accordance with the subject and correctly presented. Numerous scientific articles of recent date and in concordance to the topic of the study were consulted. The methodology of the study was clearly presented, and appropriate to the proposed objectives. The obtained results have been fully analyzed. The scientific literature, to which the reporting was made, is recent and representative in the field. The editing and linguistic quality are good. In addition, it is easy to follow by the reader, the figures and tables give good summaries, and the text editing to a thoughtful conclusion part. However, there are some points that need attention in order for the article to be published. I would like to recommend the publication of this article, and a minor revision is required for the reasons listed below:

 

The discussion section must be enhanced. The authors should further refer to previous studies with regard to biofertilizers (arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and N, P and K solubilizing bacteria) and their effect on marjoram and mung bean. For instance, they can include the following papers in order to enrich the discussion section:

 

- Faridvand, S., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Battaglia, M. L., Gitari, H. I., Raza, M. A., & Siddique, K. H. M. (2022). Application of bio and chemical fertilizers improves yield, and essential oil quantity and quality of Moldavian balm (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) intercropped with mung bean (Vigna radiata L.). Food and Energy Security, 11(2), [e319]. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.319

- Htwe, A.Z.; Moh, S.M.; Soe, K.M.; Moe, K.; Yamakawa, T. Effects of Biofertilizer Produced from Bradyrhizobium and Streptomyces griseoflavus on Plant Growth, Nodulation, Nitrogen Fixation, Nutrient Uptake, and Seed Yield of Mung Bean, Cowpea, and Soybean. Agronomy 2019, 9, 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9020077

OUR REPLY:  We thank the reviewer for their positive and encouraging comments. The discussion section was revised and also use the above mentioned references based on the reviewer comment.

Figure 8: The quality of the graph is very low and the numbers of the results are blurred. Please fix this problem.

OUR REPLY: Done.

 

On the above, we would be grateful if you would consider our manuscript to be published in the Journal of Land (MDPI).

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Authors