Effects of Agricultural Machinery Operations on PM2.5, PM10 and TSP in Farmland under Different Tillage Patterns
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The Paper - Effects of agricultural machinery operations on PM2.5, PM10 and 2 TSP in farmland under different tillage patterns - deals with an experimental study of the effects of agricultural machinery operations in wheat cultivation, investigated on the emission of three kinds of particulate matters, namely fine particulate matter (PM2.5), inhalable particulate matter late (PM10) and total suspended particulate (TSP).
In paving, on roads with low traffic volume, we know that dust, traditionally in the dry period, is: high dust and for a longer period in the air, we know that it is clayey, fine material; dust that propagates, lowers, and quickly falls on the roadbed, this is sandy soil, thicker.
Therefore, the study of the soil is of paramount importance in the present study. The Authors only mention the soil type of the test site was clayey, moisture content of 19.1%±2.9% (Line 95). Most likely the results would be different in the case of sandy soil. Even so, a characterization of the local soil would be of great value for a better understanding.
As for the literature review, the Authors would suggest comprehensively adding Pavement Paper, which has studies on dust for a long time. Also relationships with other physical environments whether urban or even airport and arid areas.
As for Materials and Methods, I would like to see a description of the soil at the site added, as well as, in the literature, to find relationships between humidity and the production of soil dust.
As for the results, some seem obvious to me, such as crushing straw, which is never just straw, lighter, but with large amounts of soil, denser. As well as with the increased speed of operation.
Even if it does not propose another way of analyzing the data, experimental statistics, mean test, is not convincing.
In the Discussion, the Authors were economical, from line 282-325, less than a page of the entire text, which shows the little approach in the literature on the subject and deficiency in the search in other areas of knowledge, in fact, dust is a problem on roads and arid areas around the world.
Of all parts of Paper the most deficient.
In conclusion, the Authors addressed some items not discussed in the Paper. Finally “(4) In different tillage patterns, some differences were observed in the amount of dust from each agricultural machinery operation. In terms of overall dust emissions, however, the total amount of dust from conventional tillage pattern with more dust emission was only 3,990 g/ha. Therefore, the operation of agricultural machinery will not cause heavy pollution to the environment”.Dust is not yet an air pollution problem, there are other current and future agricultural problems that we need to pay attention to research.
The Paper has its importance for experimentally studying a topic that has been little researched in the agricultural literature, however it must undergo a review and adjustments in all items of the article.
RECOMMEND FURTHER REVIEW.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic of silence addressed in the paper under analysis is very important for the protection of the environment and implicitly for people's health.
The scientific approach is well organized, and the results obtained are consistent and pertinent in elucidating the air pollution process.
In order to increase the importance and scientific impact of the article, as well as the necessity of carrying out this scientific approach, I recommend the authors to revise the introduction part, by better substantiating the expectations of air pollution on human health, referring to the results obtained in the last 5 years , which are globally significant.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Effects of agricultural machinery operations on PM2.5, PM10, and TSP in farmland under different tillage patterns
General comments
This paper deals with the effects of traditional tillage and conservation tillage on PM2.5, PM10, and TSP contents. Conventional tillage comprised three steps, including straw crushing, rotary tilling, and sowing, while conservation tillage composed of one sowing step. The results showed that the main dust from both systems was PM10 and TSP. The conservation tillage lowered the dust content more than the conventional tillage. Increasing the speed of the machine operation elevated the dust content. Overall, the manuscript was well written and could be of interest to Agriculture readers. Some minor suggestions are given below.
Detailed comments
L10: remove “significantly.”
L11: remove “also.”
L16: give more details about the steps of crushing, rotary tilling, and sowing in traditional tillage and one step of sawing in conservation tillage. In addition, considering to change the word “conventional tillage” to “traditional tillage” throughout the text and table or figure for consistency of the manuscript.
L45: subscript PM2.5 and PM10, and check this point throughout the text.
L49: “Scholar at home and abroad”?
L67: Try not to use the word “reduce,” and it should preserve for “reduction” or “reducing condition” in redox chemistry.
L101-104: clarify “2B-12” and “2BM-12”.
L186: italicized “P” value throughout the text.
L195-202: Rewrite these sentences as they are too short, and it is not easy to understand.
L345-349: This first sentence should be deleted. How can the authors conclude that “conventional tillage with more dust emission of 3.99 g/ha will not cause heavy pollution to the environment”? What were the criteria the authors used for this claim?
Table 3: “Sowing” should come before “No-tillage sowing” to be consistent with Table 2.
Figure 4: It should be organized into one page. It is nicer to change the graph into accumulative dust concentrations.
Figure 5: Change “Rate” in Y-axis to “Dust particulate ratio.”
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In general, the authors tried to respond to the requested suggestions, so that they were acceptable for publication.
