Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trends and Mitigation Measures in Australian Agriculture Sector—A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
There are a lot technical problems in this manuscript, such as missing spaces, text difference in size and position of superscript and subscript.
The use of normal and italics is not uniform throughout the article. After line 317, the author begins to use italics.
Sentence line 34: "Nitric Oxide (NO2) emissions from the agriculture are projected to increase by 35–60% up to 2030 due to increased nitrogen within the fertilizer and increased animal manure production" its copied directly from IPCC.
Figures are in very bad quality. Are these figures copies from other papers?
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you for your comments.
Please find the response document attached addressing your comments.
Regards,
Dr. Panchasara
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors significantly improved their manuscript. Their message became much clearer, amongst others thanks to the much clearer stated objectives, including referring to these in the conclusion. However, in my opinion, there are still some issues to improve :
L 67 - 82: Please add references for your statements. Where does the information come from?
L 84: "In Australia, agriculture is the second-largest GHG emission sector." Please add reference 1 here and at other positions in the course of the text (I think name of Government department + number of the reference might be appropriate in this case).
L 90/91 Please add the archive to the references list and cite it accordingly.
L 96 - 99: Good objectives, make the concept of the manuscript much clearer. Please harmonize language, I guess you can always use "to" + the verb.
L 183-188: Reference is missing.
L 205: wrming --> warming
L 293 and following paragraphs to L 351: Much of this part is based on references 27 and 29 which provide information on the situation of agriculture in India. In my opinion agriculture and its practices in India differ from what I expect it is in Australia. So far, the literature "indicates that the implementation of CSA technologies and practices and technologies has significant impacts" at the *India case study sites*. For instance, I doubt that a rice dominated system is the common case in Australia. In consequence, impacts of CSA technologies might be different as well. Please add information why the studies are comparable to Australia and/or add more references / case studies from regions with comparable agricultural practices
L 327 - 348: I think it is not appropriate to include all the numbers in the text. Provide a table if these are really important or summarize the message.
Legend of Fig. 3 is hardly readable
References:
- AU, C.O.
- Food.; Organization, A.
--> Please correct the author / institution names
General remarks: There are still problems with spaces and special characters throughout the text.
Please check copyright for figures if these were not produced by yourself. Consider to plot these by yourself using the available data.
Please perform a final precise spell and language check.
Author Response
DEar Reviewer,
Thank you for your comments. Please find attached response document to all your comments.
Thanks,
Dr. Panchasara
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
