Effect of Preceding Crops, Soil Packing and Tillage System on Soil Compaction, Organic Carbon Content and Maize Yield

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have some suggestions to improve MS more. My considerations are expressed below:

1. If measured or possible, please add data related to the different fractions of soil organic matter to the paper. We know that the light fraction of SOM responds faster and better to farm management.

2.     Please explain why with 500 mm rainfall, the SOC concentration is so low (0.9% or 1%)? Note that I am your colleage from Middle East, with 200 mm atmospheric precipitation, are facing such low SOM concentration , and for student, we attribute the low rainfall to the issue!3.     Why is slurry used in these soils with a low clay concentration (3.7%)? Shouldn’t these soils be considered Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZs)? Please see Nitrate, Agriculture and the Environment book by T.M. Adiscott.

4.     What are the sources of the NPK used in this paper?

5.     In the soil, the measured form of the nutrients should be clarified. For example, Phosphorus in an available form or total concentration? Is it Olsen-P or Berry-P?

6.     To justify corn yield, wouldn't it be better to measure and report the nutrient status of the soil? Doesn't crop rotation and the type of tillage system affect the concentration of phosphorus, zinc, or calcium available in the soil?

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1. Thank you for your time and thoughtful evaluation of our manuscript. We are grateful for your constructive comments and valuable suggestions. We have thoroughly considered all comments and have prepared a detailed, point-by-point response addressing each concerns. Below are the responses to all comments.

1. If measured or possible, please add data related to the different fractions of soil organic matter to the paper. We know that the light fraction of SOM responds faster and better to farm management.

 Response: We thank the Reviewer for this valuable comment. Unfortunately, we did not analyze the fractions of soil organic carbon in the current study. However, we will take this suggestion into account in future experiments.

2. Please explain why with 500 mm rainfall, the SOC concentration is so low (0.9% or 1%)? Note that I am your colleage from Middle East, with 200 mm atmospheric precipitation, are facing such low SOM concentration , and for student, we attribute the low rainfall to the issue!

Response: A low SOC level in Polish climatic conditions, despite 500 mm of rainfall, can result from several other factors. Rainfall is important, but it's not the sole determinant. Here are some explanations adapted to Polish realities:

1. Rainfall distribution and effectiveness:

• The total amount of rainfall (500 mm) is one thing, but its distribution throughout the year is another. If a large part of these precipitation events occurs in spring and autumn, and the summer is dry and hot (which happens in Poland, especially in recent years), vegetation may suffer from water shortages during crucial growth phases. This, in turn, limits the production of biomass (plant, including roots), which is the main source of organic matter for the soil.
• In intensive agriculture, if heavy rains follow a dry summer in autumn, they can lead to water erosion, washing away the valuable, organic matter-rich topsoil layer.

2. Temperature and decomposition rate:

• In the Polish climate, although winters are cold, the growing season, especially in warmer regions and with increasingly frequent heatwaves, promotes intensive microbial activity. Bacteria and fungi decompose organic matter faster, releasing carbon into the atmosphere as CO₂​. Even if there is sufficient moisture, high summer temperatures accelerate this process, hindering carbon accumulation.
• Compared to colder climate zones where decomposition processes are slowed down, the carbon cycle dynamics in Polish soils are significantly faster.

3. Soil type:

• Sandy and light soils, which cover a large part of Poland have a low capacity to stabilize organic matter. Organic carbon in them is poorly protected from decomposition and easily leached. Even with 500 mm of rainfall, if such soil dominates, the SOC level will be low.

4. Type of vegetation and biomass production:

• Low production of plant biomass (above-ground and root biomass) leads to a small input of organic matter into the soil. Despite 500 mm of rainfall, if low-productivity crops are grown, or if the soil is poor in nutrients, the SOC level will remain low.
• In Poland, cereal and rapeseed cultivation are dominant, which, although important, do not always provide as much stable organic matter to the soil as, for example, grasslands or some legumes.

 

3. Why is slurry used in these soils with a low clay concentration (3.7%)? Shouldn’t these soils be considered Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZs)? Please see Nitrate, Agriculture and the Environment book by T.M. Adiscott.

Response: We thank the Reviewer for raising this important issue. In Europe, including Poland, farms specializing in cattle breeding face significant challenges in managing slurry—specifically, how to utilize and dispose of it effectively. As a result, the use of slurry as fertilizer is permitted, even on soils with low clay content. Detailed guidelines for slurry application are provided in the Polish Act on Fertilizers and Fertilization of July 10, 2007 (Journal of Laws 2024, item 105), the Action Program aimed at reducing water pollution by nitrates from agricultural sources and preventing further pollution (January 31, 2023), and the EU Regulation 2019/1009. These documents specify restrictions related to slurry use, such as minimum distances from water bodies, application periods, slope limitations, and maximum allowable doses based on nitrogen content. However, they do not impose limitations based on soil type. These European-level guidelines were taken into account when designing and conducting our experiment. Our study was conducted on Haplic Luvisol (Aric, Ochric) soil developed from loamy sand over sandy loam. In the deeper horizons of this soil, a compact glacial clay layer is present, which prevents slurry from leaching into groundwater. We also thank the Reviewer for recommending the book ‘Nitrate, Agriculture and the Environment’ by T.M. Addiscott. We will refer to its guidelines when planning future experiments.

 4. What are the sources of the NPK used in this paper?

Response: The sources of the NPK used in this paper were:

N - ammonium nitrate 34%,

P - superphosphate 18%,

K – potassium salt 60%. (lines:133-135)

5. In the soil, the measured form of the nutrients should be clarified. For example, Phosphorus in an available form or total concentration? Is it Olsen-P or Berry-P?

 Response: The available forms of P, K, and Mg were determined in the experiment (lines 90–92).

 

6. To justify corn yield, wouldn't it be better to measure and report the nutrient status of the soil? Doesn't crop rotation and the type of tillage system affect the concentration of phosphorus, zinc, or calcium available in the soil?

Response: The changes in soil chemical properties resulting from previous crops (grassland, maize, triticale), soil compaction, and tillage methods are the subject of a separate publication currently under review in another journal. The data presented in that manuscript do not indicate a significant effect of the preceding crops on soil nutrient content. The observed yield reduction appears to be caused by other factors, which are not yet fully understood by science—such as plant diseases, weed pressure, shifts in microbial community composition, soil enzymatic activity, or allelopathic compounds.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I read with interest your manuscript entitled: Effect of preceding crops, soil packing and tillage system on soil compaction, organic carbon content and maize yield. I found it to be well-conceived and clearly written. The topic is relevant and fits well with the scope of the Journal Agriculture. I have only a few minor suggestions that may help improve the clarity of the work in some points.

Abstract:
I suggest adding some numerical evidence to strengthen your statements. For instance:

• At lines 17–18, you could specify the percentage increase in SOC.
• At line 20, the range of the observed increase in soil compaction could be added
• At line 21, it would be useful to report the percentage difference in silage mass yield between monoculture and maize grown after multi-species grassland

Results:

• In Tables 1 and 3, I suggest using the full word “Replicate” instead of the abbreviation “Rep.”, or to report the abbreviation in the caption
• It would also be helpful to use only a term to refer to specific concepts . In particular, it woul be better to use only soil compaction or only soil density throughout the manuscript, unless you are referring to two distinct properties.

Discussion:
Regarding the possibility of detecting SOC changes within 5 years (line 363), your statement — “In our study, the lack of a significant increase in soil SOC content must be attributed to the too short time period (5 years)” — seems a bit too strong. While 5 years may indeed be insufficient in this case, it is also possible that SOC may not change significantly even over a longer period.

Moreover, the cited study by Sanginés de Cárcer et al. [39] reported a strong SOC decline during the first ten years of their experiment (1967–1976), due to a change in land use (from natural meadow to cropland), followed by a stable SOC content in the subsequent 10-year period (1977–2016). This does not necessarily imply that SOC will change significantly with a longer observation period.

I suggest adding references to support the idea that a longer period might allow for better monitoring of potential SOC changes, while also noting that 5 years is often considered the minimum duration for detecting meaningful trends. (For example: Powlson et al. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x) argued  that studies of ≥5 years on arable soils can detect SOC changes of the order of 0.1–0.3 Mg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹; Lal (DOI: 10.1126/science.1097396) suggested that agronomic interventions may show effects on SOC as early as the fourth or fifth year, often reaching a plateau around the tenth year.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2. Thank you for your time and thoughtful evaluation of our manuscript. We are grateful for your constructive comments and valuable suggestions. We have thoroughly considered all comments and have prepared a detailed, point-by-point response addressing each concerns. Below are the responses to all comments.

Dear Authors, I read with interest your manuscript entitled: Effect of preceding crops, soil packing and tillage system on soil compaction, organic carbon content and maize yield. I found it to be well-conceived and clearly written. The topic is relevant and fits well with the scope of the Journal Agriculture. I have only a few minor suggestions that may help improve the clarity of the work in some points.

Abstract:
I suggest adding some numerical evidence to strengthen your statements. For instance:

• At lines 17–18, you could specify the percentage increase in SOC.
• At line 20, the range of the observed increase in soil compaction could be added
• At line 21, it would be useful to report the percentage difference in silage mass yield between monoculture and maize grown after multi-species grassland

 Response: All suggested revisions above have been implemented.

 

Results:

• In Tables 1 and 3, I suggest using the full word “Replicate” instead of the abbreviation “Rep.”, or to report the abbreviation in the caption
• It would also be helpful to use only a term to refer to specific concepts . In particular, it woul be better to use only soil compaction or only soil density throughout the manuscript, unless you are referring to two distinct properties.

Response: All suggested revisions above have been implemented.

Discussion:
Regarding the possibility of detecting SOC changes within 5 years (line 363), your statement — “In our study, the lack of a significant increase in soil SOC content must be attributed to the too short time period (5 years)” — seems a bit too strong. While 5 years may indeed be insufficient in this case, it is also possible that SOC may not change significantly even over a longer period.

Moreover, the cited study by Sanginés de Cárcer et al. [39] reported a strong SOC decline during the first ten years of their experiment (1967–1976), due to a change in land use (from natural meadow to cropland), followed by a stable SOC content in the subsequent 10-year period (1977–2016). This does not necessarily imply that SOC will change significantly with a longer observation period.

I suggest adding references to support the idea that a longer period might allow for better monitoring of potential SOC changes, while also noting that 5 years is often considered the minimum duration for detecting meaningful trends. (For example: Powlson et al. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x) argued  that studies of ≥5 years on arable soils can detect SOC changes of the order of 0.1–0.3 Mg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹; Lal (DOI: 10.1126/science.1097396) suggested that agronomic interventions may show effects on SOC as early as the fourth or fifth year, often reaching a plateau around the tenth year.

 Response: We are grateful for this helpful comment. As suggested, we have expanded the discussion to include the mentioned publications.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Reviewer comments:

This study investigates the effect of soil packing and different soil tillage methods applied before sowing of maize cultivated after grassland and in monoculture on soil compaction, soil organic carbon content, and maize yield. The data is valuable and the results are interesting. However, there are some problems for this manuscript. The main problems are 1) the Abstract of this study can be improved, and 2) the detection methods for soil indicators have not been clearly defined.

Detailed comments:

1) Line 17-21: The research results in the abstract are suggested to be quantified with specific data, instead of “... in a slight increase, ... higher silage mass yields”. Please rewrite it.

2)Line 123, 128, 154: Change the unit to superscript?

3)Line 244-252: The unit after the number indicates uniformity. “... (0-10, 10-20, 20-30 cm)...” or “...(0-10 cm, 10-20 cm, and 20-30 cm)...” ？

4)Line 136-149: What are the detection methods for the soil compaction and SOC content ? References can be supplemented.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3. Thank you for your time and thoughtful evaluation of our manuscript. We are grateful for your constructive comments and valuable suggestions. We have thoroughly considered all comments and have prepared a detailed, point-by-point response addressing each concerns. Below are the responses to all comments.

This study investigates the effect of soil packing and different soil tillage methods applied before sowing of maize cultivated after grassland and in monoculture on soil compaction, soil organic carbon content, and maize yield. The data is valuable and the results are interesting. However, there are some problems for this manuscript. The main problems are 1) the Abstract of this study can be improved, and 2) the detection methods for soil indicators have not been clearly defined.

Detailed comments:

• Line 17-21: The research results in the abstract are suggested to be quantified with specific data, instead of “... in a slight increase, ... higher silage mass yields”. Please rewrite it.

 Response: Following recommendation, the abstract has been revised to incorporate the specific values or percentage changes observed.

 Line 123, 128, 154: Change the unit to superscript?

Response: All identified errors have been rectified.

 Line 244-252: The unit after the number indicates uniformity. “... (0-10, 10-20, 20-30 cm)...” or “...(0-10 cm, 10-20 cm, and 20-30 cm)...” ？

 Response: The suggested changes have been implemented.

 Line 136-149: What are the detection methods for the soil compaction and SOC content ? References can be supplemented.

 Response: Soil organic carbon was determined by calorimetric method through oxidation with a solution of K₂Cr₂O₇ + H₂SO₄, and an absorption measurement using a spectrophotometer.

References:

1. Drzymała S., Mocek A. Methods in soil physics and soil chemistry recomended by ISO (and Polish Comity Standarization), Acta Agrophysica 2001 (48): 253-264 (in Polish).
2. Lipiec J., Stępniewski W. 1995. Ejfects of soil compaction and tillage systems on uptake and losses of nutrients. Soil & Tillage Rcscarch 35: 37-52.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors The manuscript author's effort to revise the article is evident. But there are still some ambiguities in the article that can be revised and the quality of the article improved.. Some points are mentioned below.
1)The abstract does not yet clearly state how soil compaction is applied. It is also unclear how to apply soil packs and tillage systems
2) The first sentence of the article's conclusion is ambiguous.Has planting corn increased soil organic matter content? If corn had not been planted and grass had been planted, would soil organic matter not have increased?

Therefore, this sentence should be revised. Although this finding was predictable before, and  the first sentence of the article's conclusion is not innovative!

Good Luck

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language It is best to do a basic review of the abstract and conclusion section, and seek help from native English speakers.

Author Response

1)The abstract does not yet clearly state how soil compaction is applied. It is also unclear how to apply soil packs and tillage systems
Response: The soil compaction was measured in the soil layers: 0-10, 10-20 and 20-30 cm in the leaf development stage (BBCH 19), the flowering stage (BBCH 67) and the maize kernel development stage (BBCH 79). The experimental factors were: 1. Preceding crop - grassland, maize. 2. Degree of soil packing – without soil packing, soil packing after harvesting the preceding crop. 3. Different soil tillage - conventional plough tillage method, reduced tillage method.

2) The first sentence of the article's conclusion is ambiguous.Has planting corn increased soil organic matter content? If corn had not been planted and grass had been planted, would soil organic matter not have increased?
Response: The scope of our research did not extend to investigating the influence of successive multispecies grassland use on soil organic matter content, and this relationship requires further study. Therefore, its inclusion in the conclusions is not warranted. The opening sentence of the conclusion is directly substantiated by the data we acquired, and we have opted to keep it unchanged.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf