Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The following points need to be addressed in the revised form:

1- The abstract should be rewritten; it should include the most important results and should summarize the experiment done. 

2- References should be provided for the methods used.

3- Figures 3 and 4 should be revised for their numbering and their appearance in the text

4- Language and grammar need minor revision

5- In the materials section:

The sources of N different form should be provided 

Reference to the recommended doses of fertilizer for tomato should be provided

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor revision is requiered

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments to the Author

1. This paper requires extensive language and formatting improvements.

2. Objective should be elaborated on in the introduction section.

3. References need to be rechecked and formatted as per the journal's guidelines.

4. The discussion section needs significant improvement. Currently, it is few diffuse, and provides no real insights.

5. Please add these references  

Synergistic dose permutation of isolated alkaloid and sterol for anticancer effect on young swiss albino mice https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S322769

Isolation and evaluation of anticancer efficacy of stigmasterol in a mouse model of DMBA-induced skin carcinoma DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S83514

 

 

require major revisions before publication.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

major revisions

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I believe the introduction is very well articulated and written, addressing the state of the art appropriately and outlining the objectives that this work aims to address correctly. I believe the article has substantial experimental content, and the results are presented and discussed correctly. However, it is true that studies of this kind are numerous in the literature with other types of plants, making the study itself less original. I don't see the authors referencing similar studies conducted with tomatoes and discussing their results in comparison with those available in the literature. In my opinion, the authors should improve on this aspect.

 

Majors:

-What nitrogen source was used for the control (CK)? Please specify the concentration and the type exactly.

-The materials and methods seem to be described in a very detailed, specific, and accurate manner. I just have one question; on many occasions, the authors mention: “three tomato plants with uniform growth were selected from each treatment” I think choosing only 3 plants for each of the treatments is too low a number. Why didn't the authors select a larger number to increase reproducibility?

-I don't see it appropriate to include Figure 2, as differences are very difficult to discern at a glance, and moreover, they are unique examples for each condition. Additionally, the results are quantified in Table 3; I advise the authors to remove it, as it contributes little scientifically. I also advise that the results in Table 3 be presented as column graphs to facilitate comprehension.

-Change the order of Figures 3 and 4, as in the text, Figure 4 is mentioned before Figure 3.

- I believe the discussion is well-conducted, effectively comparing the obtained results with those of other authors in a very appropriate manner regarding other plants. However, concerning other studies that have also investigated the effect of different nitrogen fertilizers on tomatoes, this point needs to be substantially corrected.

-L733-L752: I advise the authors to replace this paragraph used as a summary with another that plays a role in presenting the main conclusions of the study.

Minors:

L551: “Some researchers believe that the accumulation of ammonium nitrogen in plant leaves may lead to the uncoupling of electron transport in chloroplasts to form phos phorylation” I'm sorry, I don't understand this sentence. Could you please rephrase it?

L674: “ammonium is the primary storage and transportation form of ammonium” I don't see the point of this sentence. Could you provide a better explanation of what you mean?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

accept

Comments on the Quality of English Language

accept

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and suggestions on our manuscripts. Again ，my heartfelt thanks.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I believe the authors have responded appropriately to all my comments and suggestions, and I accept the paper in its current version.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and suggestions on our manuscripts. Again ，my heartfelt thanks.