You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
by
  • Isaac Newton Alou1,2,
  • Michael van der Laan1 and
  • John George Annandale1
  • et al.

Reviewer 1: Germán Tortosa Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Anonymous

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In general, the research in well structured, the results are consistent with the scientific literature already published and is well presented. The article is well-written. The results fit the goals of Nitrogen Journal. Before publishing, some issues should be addressed for its improvement:

 

1) In the Abstract, the N doses used should be included

2) In the Abstract, HI is not defined

3) In Materials and Methods, in 2.3 section, authors did not define DAE. Does DAE mean DAS? If yes, authors have to change it. DAE appears a lot along the text.

4) In 2.4.4 section, how was protein content measure? Dumas method is based on N elemental analysis. Indeed, where are the protein data in the article?

5) In Table 4, ET does not have statistical letters at 2015/2016 season.

6) Conclusions are quite limited and should be extended. For instance, which is the best N dose?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study focused on the N and water use efficiency of upland rice in Africa. It discussed the responses of rice growth parameters and N use efficiency to different N application rates under well-watered condition. This work can help to improve practices in the field in Africa. Only a few things need improvement before consideration to publish.

  1. All figures need to improve. Such as delete the outline of each graph, remove those same axis titles and make those graphs closer, keep fonts in the same figures or tables consistent, etc.
  2. Some abbrevs did not show their full phrases when appeared for the first time, such as HI, WS, DOY.
  3. It is expected to discuss more on water use efficiency and its relationship with N use efficiency in Discussion not just in the Results.
  4. The first sentence in the abstract, the word “affect” seems not correct or accurate, please use another suitable word.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The reviewed paper include an important issue which is the optimization of nitrogen fertilization in rice cultivation under well watered conditions. The paper has experimental character. Is based on the two year field experiment All the methodology assumptions are in my opinion correct and well described. The results are interesting and presented in a way that is not objectionable. The paper is well summed up.

I signed a few corrections at the text of manuscript attached. I suggest to check the editorial requirements. I couldn't find one literature position in the text of manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf