Analysis and Optimization of Seeding Depth Control Parameters for Wide-Row Uniform Seeding Machines for Wheat
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. The literature related to rotary tillers in the Introduction is insufficient. Please provide additional references.
2. In line 39, why is the data for 2023 placed in the current description as' will reach '？Additionally, there are many instances of punctuation errors, please verify.
3. In theIntroduction, there is a noticeable overlap between the content in lines 54-73 and lines 74-92. It is recommended that the entire manuscript be reviewed to uniformly revise such instances of redundant expression, ensuring the text is concise and rigorous.At the same time, reorganize the Introduction to highlight the necessity of the research.
4. The labeling of the "fatbox" shown in Figure 2 is incorrect and requires further verification.
5. The descriptions concerning the forward rotation of the rotary tiller blades in Line 174 and Line 176 are redundant.
6. The physical meaning of the symbol "b" in Equation (9) has not been clearly defined, and it is suggested to supplement it. Meanwhile, there is an inaccuracy in the description of the dimension of the variable "t₁" in Line 226. It is necessary to re-examine the entire derivation process of the equation and rigorously clarify the correctness of its dimension.
7. There are errors in the derivation of Equations (13) and (15). Upon rechecking, at the moment of soil particle impact, the horizontal and vertical velocity components should be in the same direction along the normal direction of the soil retaining plate, while in opposite directions along the tangential direction. It is recommended to re-derive and correct the equations to ensure the rigor and accuracy of the mechanical analysis.
8. Table 3 lacks annotations for significant items, and relevant explanations need to be supplemented. In addition, a narrative on the results of the test variance analysis should be added to improve the statistical analysis process of the test results and enhance the reliability of the conclusions.
9. In Section 2.5.3, the optimal parameter combination is specified as: rotary rotating speed of the rotary knife was 32 rad/s, the depth of the rotary knife was 120 mm, and the inclination angle of the baffle plate was 27°. However, the specific rationale for selecting this combination has not been elaborated. It is recommended that supplementary details be provided to clarify the basis for this selection.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe manuscript has issues such as unclear expression and language errors.
Author Response
Please check the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see the attachment.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
unfortunately, your work is far from meeting the requirements for publishing. There are many issues to be corrected, further explained, or argued. English must be significantly improved.
Please find my remarks and recommendations for improvement in the attached file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
English must be significantly improved
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors- Is it more appropriate to use the past tense in lines 16-20 of the abstract? Please consider.
- Lines 21-23, the conclusion is ambiguous, it is suggested to be slightly clearer.
- Post installed fertilizer pipes are quite common on existing seeders. Is this the main cause of soil blockage? Can the structure of the furrower be optimized by improving it? As it relates to the argument of the article, please strengthen the analysis by combining it with literature.
- There are still repeated statements in lines 74-80.
- Mark the position of the fertilizer pipe in Figure 1.
- It is best to place field experiments in the Materials and Methods, and test results in the Results.
- Formulas 24 and 25 are suggested to remove non-significant variables, and the formula positions are incorrect, causing confusion in format. Please revise them.
- The title of Section 3 is Results and Discussion, and Section 4 is titled Discussion.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
I have noticed that most of my observations and recommendations have been addressed properly.
Some of them have not, so there is still room for improvement. Please find my other observations in the attached file.
The explanations you have provided in your cover letter are good, but this is not enough. They should also appear in the manuscript, so that readers can better understand the issues you are clarifying.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
English can be improved for better readability of the text. Some repetitions must be removed
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
