Optimized Fertilizer–Water Management Improves Carrot Quality and Soil Nutrition and Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the North China Plain
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see the attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript by Tang et al., attempts to evaluate soil nutrient contents and plant yield, quality, and dry matter/nutrient accumulation in field carrot treated with several water–fertilizer regimens.. While I enjoyed the flow of the paper, I could not overcome the sense that there are a few issues that should be addressed prior to publication. In this context, the authors should provide more information concerning the methodological approach followed as well as to explain clearly which is the reproducibility of this work in other similar case studies.
Abstract: More tangible results are needed. What is the take home message of this study?
Introduction: The novelty of the study should be more highlighted. What is novel/new in this study, compared with other similar studies? What kind of local and global knowledge the authors want to improve? The introduction needs to set up the story. These questions aren´t clear in the introduction and need further consideration/explanation.
L.79. “We here measured”. I think a depersonalization of the work make the presentation even more clear and focuses the attention on the results obtained
Materials and Methods:
- Please provide a GIS-map of the reference site. Sampling locations should be provided. This is a must for such kind of studies.
- When was soil sampling carried out? Were seasonal variations taken into account in this study? Please explain in detail.
- Little is mentioned regarding the sampling protocols used. There are quite several protocol for sampling available in the literature, but it cannot be derived which one have the authors used or they have modified. References and more details will be helpful in this sense.
Discussion: This section needs strengthening to improve clarity.
-An issue worthy of further discussion is the interrelated issue of GHG reduction and crop yield. This is again related to the dynamic nature of "GHG release from soil/crop to air (and vice versa)" and is closely linked to the issue of temporally "bonding" loss under different conditions. Please clarify this issue in detail.
Based on the fact that GHG emissions calculations are made with high inherent uncertainty, limitation and scope of the study should be provided at the end. Limitations aren't weaknesses but can be possibilities for other studies - highlight them as necessary
Other comments
- Please make sure your conclusions' section underscores the scientific value-added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results. Highlight the novelty of your study. In addition to summarizing the actions taken and results, please strengthen the explanation of their significance. It is recommended to use quantitative reasoning comparing with appropriate benchmarks, especially those stemming from previous work.
Comments on the Quality of English Languageonly minor
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript titled "Optimized Fertilizer–Water Management Improves Carrot Quality and Soil Nutrient and Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the North China Plain" contains interesting research results for agricultural science and practice. I appreciate that these are experiments conducted over two seasons.
The research topics are current and should be continued.
However, the publication requires improvement. I included detailed comments in the original text (pdf). After making corrections, I recommend publishing the manuscript in the journal Horticulturae.
General notes:
add to keywords: Daucus carota L., fertilization, irrigation. This will make searching in databases easier
write the Latin names of species in italics
At the end of the Introduction chapter, write exactly what the aim of the reserch was and what the research hypothesis was.
Figure1, give a link in the text
In the Material and Methods section, write precisely whether it was an experiment in a field, a greenhouse or a foil tent
Was it an experimental station or an individual farm?
what was the forecrop?
learn about the new soil classification:
IUSS Working Group WRB. 2022. World Reference Base for Soil Resources. International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. 4th edition. International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS), Vienna, Austria.
write more about this microbial agent (An agricultural microbial agent 119 (Wuzhoufeng Agricultural Science and Technology Co. Ltd., Yantai, Shandong, China) 120 containing 4% N was applied to OPT plots at a rate of 1200 kg ha-1.)
The yield carrot was general or it was a marketable yield
why the interaction between sowing dates and fertilization with irrigation was not calculated
are the data in table 2 an average for the seasons?
line 287-295 delete
line 359 delete
check the statistical calculations in table 3
check the statistical calculations in table S6 and figure S3
correct the list of references (notes in the text)
I hope that my comments will help the authors improve the text of the manuscript. Thank you for your cooperation
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
Relevant researches have been carried out. Great visualization of research, lots of data presented, methodology described in detail.
In line 23, it is necessary to specify where the amount of soluble sugars and amino acids increased.
The text reference to Figure 1 is missing.
A map with the location of the experiment is missing, a graphic representation (scheme) of the experiment is missing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments and Suggestions for Authors
The current study entitled “Optimized Fertilizer–Water Management Improves Carrot Quality and Soil Nutrient and Reduces Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the North China Plain” investigated soil nutrient contents and plant yield, quality, and dry matter/nutrient accumulation in field carrot treated with some water–fertilizer regimens. The Idea of the paper is interesting and can be help the farmers and managers to characterize the rules of carrot nutrient accumulation and identify interactions between major production factors, promoting optimal management of plant nutrients and soil parameters to maximize carrot production while minimizing negative environmental impacts.
In the text, there are a few grammatical mistakes, especially in the abstract and discussion sections, so minor English editing is required. Overall, the paper has been well written, especially in results and discussion., However, there are some comments:
Abstract
The abstract provides a clear study objective; However, the material only included the treatments, and I would suggest that the authors add some details and key points; Also, it would be beneficial to add the hypotheses of the research in one or two sentences. Please highlight your result based on percentage (Bring some values in the abstract, some number values like how much changed by %).
Line15: … the carrot quality and soil nutrient and reduce the environmental …. -- > … the carrot quality, soil nutrient and reduce the environmental …..
Introduction
The introduction needs more extension, the authors have brought some results of previous research about the relation between fertilizer /irrigation and carrot yield, It's a question for the reader what is the effect of different fertilizer and irrigation strategies on carrot nutrient, I would suggest that the authors add some research about the carrot nutrient in different fertilizer and irrigation strategies to improve this gap. Also, the research hypothesis is not present in the text, however, Figure 1 is a good idea for research hypothesis, but for illustration I would suggest that add it in one or two sentences at the end of the introduction, before figure1.
Material and methods
This section is well written, but it is better if the authors show the soil characteristics in the form of table, also add a graphical experimental design (It is only a suggestion and the authors can ignore it).
Results, discussion and conclusion
These sections are well written, the results are impressive, authors provided figures in appropriate resolution; There is only one point: in the discussion section there are a few grammatical English mistakes, please check this section to avoid any mistake.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageIn the text, there are a few grammatical mistakes, especially in the abstract and discussion sections, so minor English editing is required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
