Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate on Protein Components and Yield of Low-Gluten Rice
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The experimental design for investigating the effects of nitrogen application rate on rice’s protein and yield is interesting. However, they are some mistakes as well as incomplete explanations that should be improved. In the meantime, please polish this manuscript before it is ready for publication.
Introduction
The authors should provide more background on rice species and the distribution of low gluten rice cultivation in China. Additionally, they should provide more information on how nitrogen application rates affect low-gluten rice in previous studies. It is too brief to only conclude previous research in one sentence (line 41-42). I expect more literature review in the Introduction.
Materials and Methods
- It is better to add a spatial map to show the location of the experimental site.
- Why did the authors choose N90, N135, N180, and N225? It is better to explain it either in Introduction or Method.
- Line 71: “2.3 Measurements and methods”?
- Line 73: The date range for rice maturity should be given.
- Line 84: It is necessary to briefly describe the method in Li et al. (12) in this manuscript.
- Line 105: Please provide the results of ANOVA in this manuscript.
Results
- Fig. 2. What do MS-HS, MS, and HS mean? Please explain in the caption.
- Figs. 3 and 4. What do N0-N4 mean? Please explain them in the caption.
- Tables 2, 3, 4. Please explain “a-e” after all numbers.
Discussion
The authors concluded that N135 ~ N180 is the best fertilizer rate for low-gluten rice. I did not see any explanation or discussion to prove their conclusion. A brief description is necessary to support their findings.
Author Response
Point 1: The experimental design for investigating the effects of nitrogen application rate on rice’s protein and yield is interesting. However, they are some mistakes as well as incomplete explanations that should be improved. In the meantime, please polish this manuscript before it is ready for publication.
Response 1: Thank you for your comment. We have already polishi the manuscript.
Point 2: The authors should provide more background on rice species and the distribution of low gluten rice cultivation in China. Additionally, they should provide more information on how nitrogen application rates affect low-gluten rice in previous studies. It is too brief to only conclude previous research in one sentence (line 41-42). I expect more literature review in the Introduction.
Response 2: Thank you for your comment. We have proved more information on how nitrogen application rates affect low-gluten rice in previous studies(line 42-48).
Point 3: It is better to add a spatial map to show the location of the experimental site.
Response 3: Thank you for your comment. Thanks to the experts’ opinions, we have already added it as required(line67-68).
Point 4:Why did the authors choose N90, N135, N180, and N225?
Response 4: The N180(180kg/hm2) is a conventional nitrogen application in the paddy field in this area. On this basis, setting an arithmetic reduced nitrogen application and incremental nitrogen application to study the difference of different component proteins in low-gluten rice has very important research significance.
Point 5: Line 71: “2.3 Measurements and methods”?
Response 5: Thank you for your comment. We have corrected this error in the revised manuscript(line 85,86,94).
Point 6: Line 73: The date range for rice maturity should be given.
Response 6: Thank you for your comment. We have given the rice maturity (line 83)
Point 7: Line 84: It is necessary to briefly describe the method in Li et al. (12) in this manuscript.
Response 7: Thank you for your comment.We have revised it.(line 102,103,104)
Point 8: Line 105: Please provide the results of ANOVA in this manuscript.
Response 8: Thank you for your comment.We have provide the results of ANOVA in this manuscript.(line 129,130,131)
Point 9: Fig. 2. What do MS-HS, MS, and HS mean? Please explain in the caption.
Response 9: Thank you for your comment.We have explained it in this manuscript.(line 169-170)
Point 10: Figs. 3 and 4. What do N0-N4 mean? Please explain them in the caption.
Response 10: Thank you for your comment.We have revised it(line178,189)
Point 11: Tables 2, 3, 4. Please explain “a-e” after all numbers.
Response 11: Thank you for your comment.We have explained it.(line 152,201,214)
Point 11: The authors concluded that N135 ~ N180 is the best fertilizer rate for low-gluten rice. I did not see any explanation or discussion to prove their conclusion. A brief description is necessary to support their findings.
Response 11: Thank you for your comment.We have revised it.(line 262,263)
Reviewer 2 Report
The Introduction does not provide sufficient background for the research. It is focused mainly on general information about the protein. Only some parts are directly related to the title. This proportion is not right. Please include more relevant references about the effects of nitrogen on protein and the yield of low-gluten rice in order to better emphasize the purpose of the research.
Subsection 2.3 Data analysis: Was assumptions for ANOVA checked? Why was the LSD test chosen?
Table 1: Please check the column Treatment. Why is N2, and N135 is missing?
Lines 111-112: It has been written: "The differences between the N135 and N90 or N180 treatments were not significant." Is it true? Please check the data in Table 1.
Fig.2: There is no explanation of abbreviations of MS and HS.
Fig.4. Why are there no results for 2018 and 2019? It is only information that the trend was consistent between the two experimental years (lines 164-165).
The figure numbering is incorrect.
The statistically significant differences are not presented in Table 4.
Conclusions could be more extensive.
Author Response
Point 1: The Introduction does not provide sufficient background for the research. It is focused mainly on general information about the protein. Only some parts are directly related to the title. This proportion is not right. Please include more relevant references about the effects of nitrogen on protein and the yield of low-gluten rice in order to better emphasize the purpose of the research.
Response 1: Thank you for your comment.Thank you for your comment. We have proved more information on how nitrogen application rates affect low-gluten rice in previous studies(line 42-48).
Point 2: Table 1: Please check the column Treatment. Why is N2, and N135 is missing?
Response 2: Thank you for your comment.We have revised it.(line 145,148)
Point 3: It has been written: "The differences between the N135 and N90 or N180 treatments were not significant." Is it true? Please check the data in Table 1.
Response 3: Thank you for your comment. We have revised it(line 136)
Point 4:There is no explanation of abbreviations of MS and HS.
Response 4: Thank you for your comment.We have explained it in this manuscript.(line 169-170)
Point 5: Why are there no results for 2018 and 2019? It is only information that the trend was consistent between the two experimental years (lines 164-165).
Response 5: Thank you for your comment. There is no difference in the two-year data, and we use the two-year average.
Point 5: The figure numbering is incorrect. The statistically significant differences are not presented in Table 4.Conclusions could be more extensive.
Response 5: Thank you for your comment. We have revised the number of this paper figure and added the statistically significant differences,and the conclusions of this paper was revised.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been improved. I recommend to accept in present form
