Effects of Compound Salt Concentration on Growth, Physiological and Nutritional Value of Hydroponic Forage Wheat

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The aim of the study was to assess the effect of salt stress (in various concentrations) on the growth, physiological parameters and nutritional value of seedlings and wheat grains. The research methods are correct. Research results supported by discussion. However, the article needs a lot of corrections.   1. The title is incomprehensible. It is not known whether wheat was analyzed in hydroponics or in herbs.   2. The summary is too long. I suggest removing the chapter titles in the summary.   3. The introduction refers to the purpose of the research, but the research hypothesis is missing. It is written in imprecise language. Anyway, the whole work requires linguistic correction.   4. Conclusions are too general. They require improvement and reference to the purpose of the research.   5. Too few literature citations. The scope of knowledge on the issues of salinity and related stresses is very large. Complete the literature.  

General conclusion. The work is written in an incomprehensible language. Requires language correction. The work after extensive corrections can be published in agriculture.

English needs correction

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is discussing a smart solution for the production of the forage under stress condition salinity that can replace the traditional method of the production. 

The manuscript is well-written, however some comments are in the text and here need to be addressed:

- a background or introduction sentence should be add in start of the abstract

- the introduction section need to state the problem in general (worldwide) as well as regional.

- The material and method should be clear how much sample per each measurement, and at what stage or after how many days of germination

- The results are well-presented all table has the statistical analysis and the standard error, showing the significant differences between treatments.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The research is interesting, and has benefits to the readers. The authors examined the compound salt concentration; however, the authors did not show the compositions of compound salts. I think this is an important point for the reader and linking to discussion. Moreover, the authors used the word "compound salt, composite saline solution, mixed salt concentration, and complex salt concentration which are difficult to understand. Some suggestions to improve 

 1. Line 51, … cotton straw, which has low nutritional value and poor palatability. Please insert references.

2. Lines 51-53, please insert references.

3. Line 110, What is a compound salt? Please explain meaning or definition, or composition of salts, and insert the composition of compound salts in the manuscript.

4. Line 127, please indicate the period of experiment. (7 days?)

5. Lines 130-132, 140-142, please indicate the age of plant.

6. Table 1, Buds long or Bud length?

What is bud length? Please explain in the method.

Why did the authors measure bud length only for 2,3, 4 days? Please explain in the method or discussion.

If the germination can be changed to be percentage, it would be easy to understand.

7. Table 2 and others, what is plant height/cm? Is it Plant height (cm)?, please modified.

Why did table 2 measure day 5, 6, 7, not day 1, 2,3?

Please explain in the method.

8. Table 4, please change DM/% to DM(%)….

9. Figure 1, please improve the quality.

10. Line 272, the root stem length??, please correct.

11. Lines 271-274, the authors try to discussion the composition of soil. Please clearly link the discussion to the result.

12. Line 276, what is combined salt concentrations? Please clarify.

13. Line 282, what is mixed salt concentration.

14. Line 378, what is complex salt concentration?

15. Conclusion in the abstract, and conclusion part is not compatible, please modify.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All my comments have been taken into account in the work. The article may be published in its current form.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate your positive praise for our revised manuscript and response to the reviewers’ comments.

Dr. Sujiang Zhang on behalf of all co-authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The responses from the authors are perfect, and the content is nice. I do not have any further comments.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for taking time to review the revised manuscript and response letter.

Dr. Zhang on behalf of all co-authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx