Quality Responses of Sweet Pepper Varieties Under Irrigation and Fertilization Regimes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

I find this manuscript interesting and well-designed. The data is rich and well prepared. There are some flaws, but as they are not related to experimental design or usage of analytical methods, I believe that this manuscript can be of acceptable quality after major revision.

Main reason of this is lack of some important details in material and methods, lack of detailed description of statistical analysis and not reader-friendly data presentation. However, I noticed that your statistical analysis is presented as letters; as you know this method, it should be not a problem to introduce desired corrections.

 

General comments:

- please describe your cultivars in more detail in material and methods. You can see Wala et al., 2024. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2024.115050 ). Please state seed source, cultivar properties, etc. Always use apostrophes ('Cultivar') for cultivar naming. Check where applicable. 

- was this experiment fully factorial, e.g., Cultivar x Irrigation x Fertilization? If so, describe it in detail.

- always provide g values but not rpm for centrifugation as force during centrifugation depends on rotor type (namely, diameter). Check where applicable.

- for all spectrophotometric analyses please describe generation of standard line, R2 value for this line (to state whether it was analytically acceptable) and range of concentrations used for generation of standard curve. Check where applicable.

- presentation of data is quite strange and in my opinion not reader-friendly (sometimes misleading). As I can see, your experiment is based on three factors: cultivar, irrigation regime and fertilization regime. The audience would like to know every single difference. Therefore, please rework all the data presentation. You can choose whether you like figures or tables, but please merge all data into one entity for each parameter. Thus, for each parameter (e.g., protein content) show table or figure showing values for all cultivars grown under all the experimental conditions. Therefore, for each parameter, number of results should be 3 x 4 x 2 = 24 (cultivar x fertilization x irrigation) table lines/figure bars. I recommend usage of figures, as in this journal color is free of charge, then you can use group segregation for cultivars, bar color for fertilization regime and additional bar pattern (e.g. lines, dots) for irrigation. See example I provided. Then, please present a table for results of three way ANOVA showing effects of three studied factors and all their combinations, with F values and p values. I believe that this will help you a lot. Alternatively, use table instead of figure. In my opinion, this is mandatory.

- discussion is well-written, but as you will introduce 2-3 hypotheses, please add information which hypothesis was confirmed and which was not.

I also provide some line-by line comment.

Line by line:

L34: a largest vegetable crops - please rework it, currently it is hard to state meaning;

L36: delete excellent;

L37: quantitatively, qualitatively or both?

L56: flavonoids are phenolic compounds, please change it; accordingly, delete total from phenolics;

L58: change from good to beneficial or other phrase;

L60-61: phytochemicals can be found not only in bell pepper, rewrite this sentence please;

L62-64: reference is missing;

L77: change levels to properties;

L84: Please support this with reference or state only that adequate fertilization affects mentioned traits;

L86: a type of phenolic compound?

L91: formerly you statet that organic fertilization is biologic;

L105: correct application of what?

L107: nutrition fertilizers?

L109-112: this is rather poorly presented. In such paragraph state please what is known, what is unknown, what is your plan and presented 2-3 clearly stated mechanistic hypotheses. 

L122: versions?

L122: describe plots, e.g. size, plant spacing, etc.;

L126-127: Describe drip irrigation in more detail;

L128-141: Provide detailed information on producers of these fertilizers.

L177: one- or two-electron Trolox equivalents?

L181-183: you described it already in L164-171. Decide which is to erase;

L189: I believe that there should be “catechin”;

L204: change to 6.5 g;

L226-228: this needs a lot of attention. Were variances and normality of data checked and how? Additionally, please state sample number here and provide information on acceptance of results as significant (p value). Optional task (not mandatory): If you want to analyse your data in-depth, you can conduct PCA analysis or correlation analysis for each cultivar separately or jointly.

L230-231: delete it;

L351: cultivar name is missing;

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

January, 2025

Horticulturae

 

Dear Editor,

 

On behalf of my co-authors, I would like to submit the revised form of the manuscript entitled “Quality responses of sweet pepper varieties under irrigation and fertilization regimes”, authors: Saad Masooud Abdelnaby Elhawary, Jose Luis Ordóñez-Díaz, Florentina Nicolaie, Jose Carlos Montenegro, Gabriel-Ciprian Teliban, Alexandru Cojocaru, Jose Manuel Moreno-Rojas, Vasile Stoleru.

We thank you again for your interest in our paper. We also thank the reviewer for the patient and careful examination of our manuscript and for providing ideas and corrections that will improve this manuscript.

 

We hope that we have not omitted anything that the peer-reviewers commented and recommended in their evaluation reports.

All modifications were highlighted in red color.

 

Taking into account all the comments received the sections “Abstract, Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion” have undergone major changes.

 

A part of these analyses results has been included in the supplementary file.

 

We do confirm that this work is original and the manuscript is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

 

In consideration of the publication, we hereby warrant and undertake that none of the authors has any potential conflict of interest related to this manuscript. All authors have contributed to the work and approved the final version submitted.

 

We consider that our findings could be of interest to the readers of Horticulturae journal.

 

Your consideration of the manuscript would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Prof. dr. Vasile Stoleru

Department of Horticultural Technologies, “Ion Ionescu de la Brad” Iasi University of Life Sciences, 3 Mihail Sadoveanu Alley, 700490 Iasi, Romania,

email: vasile.stoleru@iuls.ro

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Reviewer 1,

 

Thank you very much for your valuable recommendations and comments. We have carefully considered all your comments and recommendations and we have made changes in the manuscript.

All modifications were highlighted in red color.

 

General comments:

- please describe your cultivars in more detail in material and methods. You can see Wala et al., 2024. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2024.115050). Please state seed source, cultivar properties, etc. Always use apostrophes ('Cultivar') for cultivar naming. Check where applicable. 

Wala Mateusz, Kołodziejek Jeremi ,  Sieczynska Katarzyna,  Lason-Rydel Magdalena, Krępska Małgorzata. Iron biofortification in four non-heterotic red sweet cultivars of bell pepper.  Food Research International, 196, 2024, 115050, 1-13.

 

 

- was this experiment fully factorial, e.g., Cultivar x Irrigation x Fertilization? If so, describe it in detail.

Response: the cultivar description is presented in supplementary material Table S1.

 

- always provide g values but not rpm for centrifugation as force during centrifugation depends on rotor type (namely, diameter). Check where applicable.

Response: the relative centrifugal force used in our centrifuge was 21.300 × g.

 

- for all spectrophotometric analyses please describe generation of standard line, R2 value for this line (to state whether it was analytically acceptable) and range of concentrations used for generation of standard curve. Check where applicable.

Response: The standard curves of antioxidant capacity methods were built using a trolox solution in ten different concentrations from 0.1 mM to 1 mM analyzed by triplicate. The values of sloped and intercept of ABTS assay were 1.3033 and 0.0353, respectively, obtaining a R² of 0.9929. The values of sloped and intercept for DPPH method were 0.9537 and 0.0479, respectively, and R² of 0.9939.

Total phenolic compounds were quantified using a standard curve of gallic acid solution built using ten different concentrations from 0.1 mm to 2.5 mM by triplicate. The values of sloped and intercept of total phenolic method were 0.2526 and 0.241, respectively, obtaining a R² of 0.9948.

The quantitation of condensed tannins was developed using a method with a catechin standard curve built with ten different concentrations from 0.025 mm to 0.4 mM by triplicate. The values of sloped and intercept for this method were 2.9731 and 0.0558, respectively, obtaining a R² of 0.9947.

The quantification of pigments was performed using the functions proposed by Nagata and Yamashita (1992).

 

- presentation of data is quite strange and in my opinion not reader-friendly (sometimes misleading). As I can see, your experiment is based on three factors: cultivar, irrigation regime and fertilization regime. The audience would like to know every single difference. Therefore, please rework all the data presentation. You can choose whether you like figures or tables, but please merge all data into one entity for each parameter. Thus, for each parameter (e.g., protein content) show table or figure showing values for all cultivars grown under all the experimental conditions. Therefore, for each parameter, number of results should be 3 x 4 x 2 = 24 (cultivar x fertilization x irrigation) table lines/figure bars. I recommend usage of figures, as in this journal color is free of charge, then you can use group segregation for cultivars, bar color for fertilization regime and additional bar pattern (e.g. lines, dots) for irrigation. See example I provided. Then, please present a table for results of three-way ANOVA showing effects of three studied factors and all their combinations, with F values and p values. I believe that this will help you a lot. Alternatively, use table instead of figure. In my opinion, this is mandatory.

Response: We have included the table with three-way ANOVA, F value and p-value in supplementary material.  (Supplementary Table S2)

 

Response: It was also a mistake on our part that we did not put the intercept analysis for the three factors a x bx c. The data for interaction between cultivar x fertilization x irrigation are presented as graphs in Figure 1.

Regarding the statistical analysis, it made by ANOVA and the values for Significance are actually p-value

 

Reviewer 1:  discussion is well-written, but as you will introduce 2-3 hypotheses, please add information which hypothesis was confirmed and which was not.

Response: One of the hypotheses was based on the premise that in general local cultivars should be more resistant, such as Napoca than Kaptur cultivars which is grown in protected areas for at least 10 years in Romania, which has not proved to be true, this aspect of the cultivation of this hybrid is grown mainly for productivity and not quality.

It has also been shown that the Napoca cultivar is also competitive with foreign cultivars in terms of quality, in terms of antioxidant compounds and carotenoid and chlorophyll pigments

It has been demonstrated that in protected areas, pepper is a resilient species in the sense that the root system exploits a large volume of soil and has the ability to obtain quality fruit under nutrient stress (as is the case with control varinate), being a resilient species if a correct rotation is made.

We found that long pepper is a species adaptable to organic fertilization, which shows that it is a species adaptable to sustainable or even organic farming system if the maximum amount of N is not exceeded according to the European directive 848/2021.

Also in conditions of optimizing the water content there is the possibility of reducing the consumption, obtaining quality fruit, only if the water is evenly distributed throughout the growing season

 

 

I also provide some line-by line comment.

Line by line:

L34: a largest vegetable crops - please rework it, currently it is hard to state meaning;

Response: - one a largest vegetable crops

L36: delete excellent;

Response: - deleted

L37: quantitatively, qualitatively or both?

Response: – in general we refer to the nutritional quality of peppers but in line 54 we refer to both

L56: flavonoids are phenolic compounds, please change it; accordingly, delete total from phenolics; Response: - deleted

L58: change from good to beneficial or other phrase;

Response: - used beneficial

L60-61: phytochemicals can be found not only in bell pepper, rewrite this sentence please; Response: Phytochemicals are a class of physiologically active, non-nutritive substances found in many vegetables for fruits that have antioxidant activity and other health advantages

L62-64: reference is missing;

Response: Add

L77: change levels to properties;

Response: This direct link between yield and health has piqued the interest of plant breeders, who are focusing their research on genotypes with high quality level

L84: Please support this with reference or state only that adequate fertilization affects mentioned traits;

Response: add reference

L86: a type of phenolic compound? R

Response: - rewrite / esveratrol, meta-coumaric acid, ortho-coumaric acid, clorogenic acid, caffeic acid, myricetin, rutin, luteolin-7-O-glucoside and quercitin-3-O-rhamnoside

L91: formerly you statet that organic fertilization is biologic;

Response: Rewrite - The application of manure fertilizers, has determined a good percentage of antioxidant activity

L105: correct application of what?

Response: Recent studies have shown that the optimal irrigation determines the qualitative improvement of Solanaceae fruits in correlation with genotypes, growth conditions and nutrition 

L107: nutrition fertilizers?

Response: rewrite

L109-112: this is rather poorly presented. In such paragraph state please what is known, what is unknown, what is your plan and presented 2-3 clearly stated mechanistic hypotheses. 

Response: Compared to the previous research, our study focuses on the individual and combined effect of new cultivars compared to a domestic cultivar, three different nutrition methods (organic, biological and chemical) compared to an untreated version and two irrigation regimes to improve the quality of long pepper fruits

L122: versions?

Response: rewrite

L122: describe plots, e.g. size, plant spacing, etc.;

Response: Each experimental plot was represented by 12 plant for repetition, with 90 cm between rows and 35 cm between plants per row, with a total harvested area of 272 m².

L126-127: Describe drip irrigation in more detail;

Response: Two distinct irrigation regimes (IR) were implemented. The water was distributed using the farm's drip irrigation system over a 26-week period, applying in variant 1 (IR1) 200 mc/ha, respective variant 2 (IR2) with 300 mc/ha, resulting a rate of 5200 m³·ha^-1 (IR1) and 7800 m³·ha^-1 (IR2), respective.

L128-141: Provide detailed information on producers of these fertilizers.

Response: Re-write this paragraph: Moreover, three different fertilization methods were used: chemical, organic and biological compare with unfertilized version.  Chemical fertilizers were applied to the soil using a dose of 800 kg ha⁻¹. Chemical nutrition used a complex of 400 kg·ha^-1 Nutrispore®N:P:K -20:20:20, , applied during the soil preparation, and 400 kg·ha^-1 Nutrispore®, N:P:K -8:24:24, applied two times during vegetation period, when the first fruit reached a 1 cm and the last dose when the fruit from third level reached 1 cm. Organic fertilizer represented by Orgevit ^® was applied in a dose of 2500 kg ha⁻¹. The organic manure was applied three times as follows: 50% of the total applied during soil preparation; 25% when the first fruit reached a 1 cm and the last dose (25%) when the fruit from third level reached 1 cm. Biological fertilization with Micoseed MB®, 60 kg·ha^-1, was applied to the soil; and during the vegetation period, Nutryaction®, 1.5 l·ha^-1, was applied three times. Biological fertilizer is based on microorganisms and contains the following arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal spores: Claroideoglomus etunicatum, Funneliformis mosseae, Glomus aggregatum, and Rhizophagus intraradices. In addition, the product is complexed with fungi and bacteria belonging to the genera Trichoderma, Streptomyces, Bacillus, and Pseudomonas.

 

L177: one- or two-electron Trolox equivalents?

L181-183: you described it already in L164-171. Decide which is to erase;

Response:  deleted  

L189: I believe that there should be “catechin”;

Response: rewrite

L204: change to 6.5 g;

Response: rewrite

L226-228: this needs a lot of attention. Were variances and normality of data checked and how? Additionally, please state sample number here and provide information on acceptance of results as significant (p value). Optional task (not mandatory): If you want to analyse your data in-depth, you can conduct PCA analysis or correlation analysis for each cultivar separately or jointly. Response: Supplementary material Figures 3-9

L230-231: delete it;

Response: deleted

L351: cultivar name is missing;

Response: complete and rewrite

 

 

Thank you!

 

 

A part of these analyses results has been included in the supplementary file.

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Dear Authors,

thank you for your Manuscript.

The current work aimed at studying the effects of interactions among  pepper cultivars, irrigation regimes and fertilization methods on the quality attributes of peppers fruits is relevant and interesting.

The research was carried out at a modern methodological level. The obtained results, in general, expand the understanding of the above factors significance affecting plants and the importance of selecting the most adapted forms of plants to the conditions of crop cultivation in order to obtain plant products with high quality characteristics.

However, there are several comments on the manuscript.

Comments on the sections of the manuscript:

Introduction

1)      There is no information about the novelty of the results obtained by the authors. It should be emphasized that the works of a system plan aimed at studying the influence of a set of factors on plants, taking into account the genetically determined features of the crop crown, there are not many in the literature. In connection with this the purpose …

Materials and Methods

2)  Please justify the use of a loam-clay chernozem with the specified agrochemical characteristics in the greenhouse. Was anything grown in this soil before planting the peppers, how was it prepared before the start of the vegetation experiment?

 3)     Please justify the use of the specified doses of fertilizers and describe how fertilizers were introduced into the soil-plant complex during the vegetation period of the plants.

 4)      What is the repetition of the experiment (how many plants of each variety were there per experimental variant?)? How many times was the experiment carried out during 2021-2022?

Results

5)      In Table 1, a footnote should be made that it presents the average values ​​of the quality characteristics in the Variety effects row - for each pepper hybrid in Tables 2 and 3; in the Fertilisation effects row - for all hybrids in the variants with the application of each fertilizer or in the control (Table 2); in the irrigation regimes row - the average for all hybrids in each irrigation variant or in the control (Table 3).

 6)      In table 3, a footnote should indicate where (in which table) the control for each hybrid with different irrigation levels can be found.

 7)      In Table 4, a footnote should indicate what is meant by the average values ​​for each Variable.

 8)      Authors: Lines 284-286. Specifically, the untreated version and biological fertilization increased the antioxidant activity and pigment richness of the Kornelya F₁ variety more than the organic version did.

 Reviewer: Stylistically, this is not a good sentence. How can the unprocessed version increase anything? It would be better, for example: ... in the variants without fertilization and with the introduction of biological fertilizers, higher values of such indicator are noted in the plants fruits.

 9)      Authors: Lines 290-293. For example, Kornelya peppers treated with organic fertilization and an irrigation regime of 5200 m³·ha^-1 presented the highest antioxidant activity and chlorophyll levels compared with those of the other combinations.

 Reviewer: Data on the reaction of the Kornelya peppers in the variant with organic fertilizer at an irrigation regime of 5200 m³ ha^-1 are not provided. In Table 3, it was presented the averaged data for fertilizers and control on the Kornelya peppers quality  in variants with an irrigation level of 5200 m³ ha^-1 or an irrigation level of 7800 m³ ha^-1. In Table 4, it was presented the averaged data on the peppers quality characteristics for three hybrids overall in the variant with organic fertilizer at an irrigation level of 5200 m³ ha^-1 or an irrigation level of 7800 m³ ha^-1.

 10)  Authors: Lines 372-375. The high level of nutritive compounds in the untreated variant can also be explained by the fact that the species benefit resiliently from nutrients from other previous crops but also in response to nutrient- related antistress factors.

 Reviewer: Please clarify how the soil was prepared for planting after the end of the previous growing season.

 11)  The authors suggest: Lines 400-404. Further the question can be raised: If the plants have not been fertilized, how is it that the main bioactive components are in higher quantity? The answer can be justified physiologically because under stress conditions, plant metabolism changes in the sense that generative activity is more intense than vegetative activity, PCAs being directed to fruits (Figure 3S).

 Reviewer: This may also be due to the fact that the plants were initially grown on non-depleted soil and they did not experience a deficiency of nutrients. And the presence of clay in the soil composition, a source of various microelements, serves as confirmation of this. in the soil

Conclusions

Authors: Line 439-440. Moreover, the control and organic fertilization had positive effects on both the antioxidant activity and the chlorophyll content.

Reviewer:  a remark similar to that in 8).

The manuscript may be recommended for publication after editing its text and tables in accordance with the reviewer's comments.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

December , 2024

Horticulturae

 

Dear Editor,

 

On behalf of my co-authors, I would like to submit the revised form of the manuscript entitled “Quality responses of sweet pepper varieties under irrigation and fertilization regimes”, authors: Saad Masooud Abdelnaby Elhawary, Jose Luis Ordóñez-Díaz, Florentina Nicolaie, Jose Carlos Montenegro, Gabriel-Ciprian Teliban, Alexandru Cojocaru, Jose Manuel Moreno-Rojas, Vasile Stoleru.

We thank you again for your interest in our paper. We also thank the reviewer for the patient and careful examination of our manuscript and for providing ideas and corrections that will improve this manuscript.

 

We hope that we have not omitted anything that the peer-reviewers commented and recommended in their evaluation reports.

All modifications were highlighted in red color.

 

Taking into account all the comments received the sections “Abstract, Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion” have undergone major changes.

 

A part of these analyses results has been included in the supplementary file.

 

We do confirm that this work is original and the manuscript is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

 

In consideration of the publication, we hereby warrant and undertake that none of the authors has any potential conflict of interest related to this manuscript. All authors have contributed to the work and approved the final version submitted.

 

We consider that our findings could be of interest to the readers of Horticulturae journal.

 

Your consideration of the manuscript would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Prof. dr. Vasile Stoleru

Department of Horticultural Technologies, “Ion Ionescu de la Brad” Iasi University of Life Sciences, 3 Mihail Sadoveanu Alley, 700490 Iasi, Romania,

email: vasile.stoleru@iuls.ro

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Reviewer 2,

 

Thank you very much for your valuable recommendations and comments. We have carefully considered all your comments and recommendations and we have made changes in the manuscript.

All modifications were highlighted in red color.

Same, into the paper we include reviewer 1 comments.

 

 

Introduction

• There is no information about the novelty of the results obtained by the authors. It should be emphasized that the works of a system plan aimed at studying the influence of a set of factors on plants, taking into account the genetically determined features of the crop crown, there are not many in the literature. In connection with this the purpose …

Response: All changes in the introduction are highlighted in red. The proposed hypotheses are in correlation with the specific literature.

 

Materials and Methods

• Please justify the use of a loam-clay chernozem with the specified agrochemical characteristics in the greenhouse. Was anything grown in this soil before planting the peppers, how was it prepared before the start of the vegetation experiment?

 

Response: With regard to growing peppers on this type of soil, this is determined by the native soil characteristics. Greenhouses at the experimental farm station have been mounted on this soil for 12 years. One can also speak of an anthropized loam-clay chernozem soil.

 

 3)     Please justify the use of the specified doses of fertilizers and describe how fertilizers were introduced into the soil-plant complex during the vegetation period of the plants.

Response: The doses were applied in correlation with the specific element consumption of the pepper. For the organic fertilizers it was taken into account that from the specialized literature it results that in the first year the plants use around 70% of the applied quantity. The application was done manually, taking into account the area of each experimental variant.

Also the whole paragraph concerning the application of fertilizers from MM was improved.

 

 4)      What is the repetition of the experiment (how many plants of each variety were there per experimental variant?)? How many times was the experiment carried out during 2021-2022?

 

Response: The study considered one crop per year, from April to October, for 26 weeks.

Each experimental plot was represented by 12 plant for repetition, with 90 cm between rows and 35 cm between plants per ro, with a total harvested area of 272 m².

 

Results

5)      In Table 1, a footnote should be made that it presents the average values ​​of the quality characteristics in the Variety effects row - for each pepper hybrid in Tables 2 and 3; in the Fertilisation effects row - for all hybrids in the variants with the application of each fertilizer or in the control (Table 2); in the irrigation regimes row - the average for all hybrids in each irrigation variant or in the control (Table 3).

 6)      In table 3, a footnote should indicate where (in which table) the control for each hybrid with different irrigation levels can be found.

 7)      In Table 4, a footnote should indicate what is meant by the average values ​​for each Variable.

Response: # under each of the 4 tables it is specified that the data in the tables are the mean values for each variable or combination of factors between cultivar x fertilizer; cultivar x irrigation; fertilizer x irrigation.

We include supplementary material for ANOVA, F and p-value for individual or factor combination.

 

 

 8)      Authors: Lines 284-286. Specifically, the untreated version and biological fertilization increased the antioxidant activity and pigment richness of the Kornelya F₁ variety more than the organic version did.

 Reviewer: Stylistically, this is not a good sentence. How can the unprocessed version increase anything? It would be better, for example: ... in the variants without fertilization and with the introduction of biological fertilizers, higher values of such indicator are noted in the plants fruits.

 

Response: Specifically, in the variants without fertilization and biological application, higher values of such indicator are noted in the plants fruits, the untreated version increased the antioxidant activity and pigment richness of the ‘Kornelya’ variety more than the organic version did.

 

 9)      Authors: Lines 290-293. For example, Kornelya peppers treated with organic fertilization and an irrigation regime of 5200 m³·ha^-1 presented the highest antioxidant activity and chlorophyll levels compared with those of the other combinations.

 Reviewer: Data on the reaction of the Kornelya peppers in the variant with organic fertilizer at an irrigation regime of 5200 m³ ha^-1 are not provided. In Table 3, it was presented the averaged data for fertilizers and control on the Kornelya peppers quality in variants with an irrigation level of 5200 m³ ha^-1 or an irrigation level of 7800 m³ ha^-1. In Table 4, it was presented the averaged data on the peppers quality characteristics for three hybrids overall in the variant with organic fertilizer at an irrigation level of 5200 m³ ha^-1 or an irrigation level of 7800 m³ ha^-1.

 

Response: We have made modifications to the paper so that the data on the interaction between the three variables are presented in the form of graphs Figure 1 and sub-chapter 3.7. respectively and presented in figures

 

 

 10)  Authors: Lines 372-375. The high level of nutritive compounds in the untreated variant can also be explained by the fact that the species benefit resiliently from nutrients from other previous crops but also in response to nutrient- related antistress factors.

 Reviewer: Please clarify how the soil was prepared for planting after the end of the previous growing season.

Response: The increase level of nutritive compounds in the untreated variant can also be explained by the fact that the species benefit resiliently from nutrients from previous crops but also in response to nutrient-related antistress factors.

 11)  The authors suggest: Lines 400-404. Further the question can be raised: If the plants have not been fertilized, how is it that the main bioactive components are in higher quantity? The answer can be justified physiologically because under stress conditions, plant metabolism changes in the sense that generative activity is more intense than vegetative activity, PCAs being directed to fruits (Figure 3S).

 Reviewer: This may also be due to the fact that the plants were initially grown on non-depleted soil and they did not experience a deficiency of nutrients. And the presence of clay in the soil composition, a source of various microelements, serves as confirmation of this. in the soil

Response: This may also be due to the fact that the plants have been grown on an undrained soil with a higher clay content, which has the ability to retain a higher amount of macro- and microelements, with a nutritive role, on the surface of the particle.

Same, we include supplementary material for PCA and person correlation FigureS3 to Figure S9

 

Conclusions

Authors: Line 439-440. Moreover, the control and organic fertilization had positive effects on both the antioxidant activity and the chlorophyll content.

Reviewer:  a remark similar to that in 8).

 

Response: In the organic and untreated variants noted positive effects on antioxidant activity and pigment contents. With the exception of TPC and protein, where chemical fertilization increased the highest values, organic and biological fertilization ensure the production of nutraceutical-rich fruits, even with a reduced but constant irrigation regime.

 

 

 

The changes or comments made by the other reviewer should also be taken into account.

 

Thank you!

 

 

A part of these analyses results has been included in the supplementary file.

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The deficiencies and suggestions seen in the manuscript are stated in the text. Implementation of these suggestions will strengthen the impact of the manuscript. The data in the Results section of the manuscript is supported by literature. It would be more appropriate to present the data in the Results section and to provide the support section with literature in the Discussion section. The yield values ​​for peppers are not presented in the article (I think they can be used in other publications), but using them here can make significant contributions to the manuscript.

The Discussion section and the Conclusion section of the manuscript are very similar, and these should be interpreted and supported by literature, especially in the Discussion section. A similar situation applies to the Abstract section. There are no data and explanations regarding experiment design and parameters and research results in the Abstract. It needs to be corrected.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments.

All comments and changes are includes in manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

 

Quality attributes of sweet pepper varieties grown under different irrigation regimes and nutrition systems

 

The used incorrect terms are main problems in this MS

Starting from the title, nutrition systems is not correct but fertilization methods (mineral, organic and biological) as authors mentioned.

Line 25: various cropping systems (organic and conventional) not correct but fertilization methods, please as cropping system includes different crops but the authors studied only one crop.

 

More comments in details:

1- The title should be changed to be clear and correct using the right terms

2- Abstract: this section is not accepted due to the missing treatments, main findings using the rate of increase/decrease according to the control

- The first paragraph (from lines 15 to 24): sweet pepper is…… on overall quality features. Only sentence as introduction part in the abstract section is enough, please correct

- Lines 24-25, Please more details even 2 sentences explaining the main treatments, please

-

3- Introduction: this section is not well-organized as included 3 paragraphs; the first very short and without any ref., second very long (from lines 41 to 141), and third one.

- In general, not accepted to find any part (paragraph) in this section without ref. like first one (lines from 36 -40)

- Perfect Introduction section should include 3-5 paragraphs depending on the title such as one on the studied crop (importance, global cultivated area, production, ….), farming systems (comparison between the studied systems with focus on sweet pepper as you can), production of sweet pepper under different irrigation regimes, etc.

- Very update ref. in this section should be included mainly refs from 2024, 2023 and 2022

4- Materials and Methods:

- the analyses of used soil should be double checked, mainly the following values even not correct or the units:

the electrical conductivity (EC) of 482 µS·cm-2 (use the common unit please dS m-1)

organic matter (OM) of 28.32 mg·kg-1 (use the correct unit in % or g kg-1)

N of 2.8 g·kg-1 (which kind of N available or total?)

and P of 34 mg·kg-1 (check again please)

- Line 159: the author mentioned that “A total of 24 versions were collected from exp…..” which versions, you are talking on soil samples?

- It is very recommended to add some photos for this work and flowchart of this study, which can include all treatments and studied measurements in general

- Definity, the following part is not clear and must be -rewetting in a clear for the readers which mineral, organic, and biological used fertiliers and their sources, and applied amounts:

“Fertilizers were applied to the soil at a dose of 800 kg ha−1 for the chemical treatment 167 and 2500 kg ha−1 for the organic treatment. Both fertilizers were applied three times as 168 follows: 50% of the total amount in coincidence with the final soil preparation prior to 169 planting; 25% when the first fruit reached a 1 cm diameter; and the last dose (25%) when 170 the first fruit of the third cluster reached a 1 cm diameter. The chemical fertilizer used was 171 a complex fertilizer N:P:K -20:20:20, 400 kg·ha-1 , which was applied to the soil during land 172 preparation, and Nutrispore® , N:P:K -8:24:24, kg·ha-1 , which was applied in three appli- 173 cations during the growing season. Organic fertilization with Orgevit® 1000 kg·ha-1 was 174 applied to the soil at the time of land preparation; during the growing season, Du- 175 alspore® , N:P:K -4:8:10, 400 kg·ha-1 , was applied in three different phases; biological ferti- 176 lization with Micoseed MB® , 60 kg·ha-1 , was applied to the soil; and during the vegetation 177 period, Nutryaction® , 1.5 l·ha-1, was applied three times”

 

- It is so easy in the tables to use I1 = 5200 m3 ha-1 and I2= 7800 m3 ha-1

And in the footnote write the meaning for sure

 

Where the control in all tables? Even under main effects?

All presented results in tables are missing the control, please

 

Major revision is needed

Thanks

 

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2

Quality attributes of sweet pepper varieties grown under different irrigation regimes and nutrition systems

The used incorrect terms are main problems in this MS

All terms include in this MS was improved

Starting from the title, nutrition systems is not correct but fertilization methods (mineral, organic and biological) as authors mentioned.

Line 25: various cropping systems (organic and conventional) not correct but fertilization methods, please as cropping system includes different crops but the authors studied only one crop.

Improve the title with reviewer comments

Authors: Line 25 was improved: under effects of various fertilization methods (chemical, organic, biologic),

More comments in details:

• The title should be changed to be clear and correct using the right terms

Authors: improved

2- Abstract: this section is not accepted due to the missing treatments, main findings using the rate of increase/decrease according to the control

Authors: Abstract was improved and correct according reviewers

- The first paragraph (from lines 15 to 24): sweet pepper is…… on overall quality features. Only sentence as introduction part in the abstract section is enough, please correct

Authors: improved

- Lines 24-25, Please more details even 2 sentences explaining the main treatments, please

Authors: abstract was improved

3- Introduction: this section is not well-organized as included 3 paragraphs; the first very short and without any ref., second very long (from lines 41 to 141), and third one.

Authors: the Introduction was improved and remade

- In general, not accepted to find any part (paragraph) in this section without ref. like first one (lines from 36 -40)

Authors: remade

- Perfect Introduction section should include 3-5 paragraphs depending on the title such as one on the studied crop (importance, global cultivated area, production, ….), farming systems (comparison between the studied systems with focus on sweet pepper as you can), production of sweet pepper under different irrigation regimes, etc.

- Very update ref. in this section should be included mainly refs from 2024, 2023 and 2022

4- Materials and Methods:

- the analyses of used soil should be double checked, mainly the following values even not correct or the units:

the electrical conductivity (EC) of 482 µS·cm-2 (use the common unit please dS m-1)

Authors: 482 µS·cm^-1

organic matter (OM) of 28.32 mg·kg-1 (use the correct unit in % or g kg-1)

Authors: 2.83%

N of 2.8 g·kg-1 (which kind of N available or total?)

Authors: total N

and P of 34 mg·kg-1 (check again please)

Authors: 34 mg·kg ^-1

- Line 159: the author mentioned that “A total of 24 versions were collected from exp…..” which versions, you are talking on soil samples?

Authors: the total samples refer to sweet paper for interaction factors: 3 varieties x 4 treatments x 2 irrigation

- It is very recommended to add some photos for this work and flowchart of this study, which can include all treatments and studied measurements in general

- Definity, the following part is not clear and must be -rewetting in a clear for the readers which mineral, organic, and biological used fertiliers and their sources, and applied amounts:

“Fertilizers were applied to the soil at a dose of 800 kg ha−1 for the chemical treatment 167 and 2500 kg ha−1 for the organic treatment. Both fertilizers were applied three times as 168 follows: 50% of the total amount in coincidence with the final soil preparation prior to 169 planting; 25% when the first fruit reached a 1 cm diameter; and the last dose (25%) when 170 the first fruit of the third cluster reached a 1 cm diameter. The chemical fertilizer used was 171 a complex fertilizer N:P:K -20:20:20, 400 kg·ha-1 , which was applied to the soil during land 172 preparation, and Nutrispore® , N:P:K -8:24:24, kg·ha-1 , which was applied in three appli- 173 cations during the growing season. Organic fertilization with Orgevit® 1000 kg·ha-1 was 174 applied to the soil at the time of land preparation; during the growing season, Du- 175 alspore® , N:P:K -4:8:10, 400 kg·ha-1 , was applied in three different phases; biological ferti- 176 lization with Micoseed MB® , 60 kg·ha-1 , was applied to the soil; and during the vegetation 177 period, Nutryaction® , 1.5 l·ha-1, was applied three times”

Authors: this part was improved.

 

- It is so easy in the tables to use I1 = 5200 m3 ha-1 and I2= 7800 m

Authors: we prefer to keep same code because for varieties and fertilizers used complete names

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study investigated the effects of different irrigation regimes and fertilization methods on the quality of bell peppers, filling the research gap in the comparison of organic and conventional agricultural practices and having important agricultural application value. By conducting a detailed analysis of three bell pepper varieties (Kornelya F1, Kaptur F1, and Napoca F1), the study revealed the genetic differences between the varieties in terms of antioxidant activity and chlorophyll content, providing scientific basis for breeding and variety selection. The study results showed that organic fertilization and precise irrigation techniques (such as drip irrigation) had significant advantages in improving crop nutrient content and antioxidant capacity, supporting the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices and having high social and environmental significance. The study design was rigorous, using a variety of experimental methods and statistical analysis techniques to ensure the reliability and scientific validity of the results. The study findings have practical application value and can provide specific cultivation and management recommendations for farmers and agricultural practitioners, helping to improve bell pepper yields and quality. The study cites a large number of references, showcasing the authors' in-depth understanding and research background in related fields, enhancing the credibility and academic value of the study. 

 

The description in certain parts of the article is lengthy, which may affect the reader's reading experience and understanding effect. It is suggested to express in a more concise and straightforward manner. Although the research results are of great significance, the discussion in some aspects is not deep enough, and the potential mechanisms and theoretical basis of certain experimental results have not been fully explained. The way some data and figures are presented is rather monotonous, lacking visual appeal, which may affect the reader's intuitive understanding and interest in the research results. In the discussion section, more in-depth analysis of the experimental results should be added, especially a more detailed explanation of the potential mechanisms behind the impact of different irrigation and fertilization methods on bell pepper quality. Optimize the structure and language expression of the article to reduce lengthy descriptions and make it more concise and clear, thus improving its readability. Enhance the diversity and visual appeal of data and figures, for example, by using more chart types and color differentiation to enhance the reader's intuitive understanding and interest in the research results.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments.

all changes made in the MS

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled “Quality attributes of sweet pepper varieties grown under different irrigation regimes and nutrition systems” analyzes the effects of irrigation regimes and nutrition systems on the quality attributes of sweet pepper. The work is interesting and has a certain meaning to the field. However, the flaws are obvious. My suggestion is a major revision.

As far as I am concerned, the background takes too much length of Abstract which exceeds a half. Considering this is a research article, authors should focus on the contents of the study including design and results. Besides, the description of the results in the abstract is general which can not show the findings of the study. A conclusion is also needed in the end of the abstract.

The second paragraph of the introduction is too long and should be divided into several paragraphs.

Line 153: It is suggested to use the full name of a.s.l.

I think the authors are confused about the distance between the Results and the Discussion. Some descriptions such as Line 274-275 and Line 282-284 should be placed in the Discussion section, not results section. Moreover, the references should not appear in the Results section unless the authors merge two sections into the Results and Discussion as far as I am concerned. It is strongly suggested the authors refer to other published research articles in the journal before revising the manuscript.

The conclusion is too long.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

thank you very much for your comments.

all changes made in the present MS.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

many thanks for your very small improvement

I did not find any corrections for many comments such as:

3- Introduction: this section is not well-organized as included 3 paragraphs; the first very short and without any ref., second very long (from lines 41 to 141), and third one.

- In general, not accepted to find any part (paragraph) in this section without ref. like first one (lines from 36 -40)

- Perfect Introduction section should include 3-5 paragraphs depending on the title such as one on the studied crop (importance, global cultivated area, production, ….), farming systems (comparison between the studied systems with focus on sweet pepper as you can), production of sweet pepper under different irrigation regimes, etc.

 

- Very update ref. in this section should be included mainly refs from 2024, 2023 and 2022

 

- It is very recommended to add some photos for this work and flowchart of this study, which can include all treatments and studied measurements in general

Please consider all my comments

thanks

 

 

 

Author Response

Regarding to the last MS and your comments

3- Introduction: this section is not well-organized as included 3 paragraphs; the first very short and without any ref., second very long (from lines 41 to 141), and third one.

- In general, not accepted to find any part (paragraph) in this section without ref. like first one (lines from 36 -40)

- Perfect Introduction section should include 3-5 paragraphs depending on the title such as one on the studied crop (importance, global cultivated area, production, ….), farming systems (comparison between the studied systems with focus on sweet pepper as you can), production of sweet pepper under different irrigation regimes, etc.

- Very update ref. in this section should be included mainly refs from 2024, 2023 and 2022

 - It is very recommended to add some photos for this work and flowchart of this study, which can include all treatments and studied measurements in general

 Authors: all changes made by blue colour

Introduction part, results and discussions were improved. The bibliography has been reordered and improved.

As for not using only references from the last 3 years, I don't think it's ok. We consider that for long sweet pepper a close bibliography was used.

at your request and to prove that the experiment is real we have attached images from the field, to prove that they were carried out under optimal conditions. We also attached a flowchart for the analysis. As far as the yield, water and dry matter results are concerned, these aspects are the subject of another paper.

Thank you very much!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author revised all the questions.

Author Response

Thank you very much!

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although the authors revised the manuscript in a certain degree. However, the structure and format are poor especially the abtract, results, and discussion. I can't believe the authors take it serious and I am also sorry I can't be more positive.

Author Response

Although the authors revised the manuscript in a certain degree. However, the structure and format are poor especially the abtract, results, and discussion. I can't believe the authors take it serious and I am also sorry I can't be more positive.

Authors: all changes made by blue colour

Introduction part, results and discussions were improved. The bibliography has been reordered and improved.

As for not using only references from the last 3 years, I don't think it's ok. We consider that for long sweet pepper a close bibliography was used.

at your request and to prove that the experiment is real we have attached images from the field, to prove that they were carried out under optimal conditions. We also attached a flowchart for the analysis. As far as the yield, water and dry matter results are concerned, these aspects are the subject of another paper.

Thank you very much!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf