Effect of a Slow-Release Urea Nanofertilizer on Soil Microflora and Yield of Direct Seeded Rice (Oryza sativa L.)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have investigated effect of a slow-release urea nanofertilizer on soil microflora and yield of rice. The MS has presented some information on that nano urea fertilizer could be considered as a possible alternative for conventional fertilizer, but there were lots of flaws in MS. Hence, it is not recommended to be accepted in the current form.

1.     Abstract

Missing results for column experiment.

2.     M&M

  You mentioned “Experiments were carried out using 16 columns fabricated with the use of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes…..”. “Three types of soil texture samples were collected….., two N sources and 4 application rates of N. Hence, the treatments were not satiable in 16 columns. At least, need 3 x 2 x 4 x 3 (replicates) = 72 columns.

  Lack of basic soil properties for tested soils both in columns and field experiments.

  Need more details how did for the statistical analysis.

3.     Results

Add any results of interactions between the treatments for the column experiments.

4.     Discussions

Not in depth. There were some interactions between the treatments. You should explain the reasons why and what happened in the experiments.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language is required.

Author Response

Reviewer #1:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors: The authors have investigated effect of a slow-release urea nanofertilizer on soil microflora and yield of rice. The MS has presented some information on that nano urea fertilizer could be considered as a possible alternative for conventional fertilizer, but there were lots of flaws in MS. Hence, it is not recommended to be accepted in the current form.

 

Comment 1: Abstract: Missing results for column experiment.

Reply: Thank you for indicating this aspect in the abstract. The abstract has been revised and the results of the soil column study have been included in the revised manuscript.

 

Comment 2:  M&M section.

Comment 2a: You mentioned “Experiments were carried out using 16 columns fabricated with the use of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes…..”. “Three types of soil texture samples were collected….., two N sources and 4 application rates of N. Hence, the treatments were not satiable in 16 columns. At least, need 3 x 2 x 4 x 3 (replicates) = 72 columns.

Reply: The experiment was performed with 7treatments*3 soil types*3 replications. Therefore, a total of 63 columns were required. 4 sets of 16 columns were used in this study.   

 

Comment 2b:  Lack of basic soil properties for tested soils both in columns and field experiments.

Reply: The soil properties have been included as the supplementary Table 1 in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 2c: Need more details how did for the statistical analysis.

Reply: Thank you for your comment. The details have been enhanced in the indicated section.

 

Comment 3:  Results: Add any results of interactions between the treatments for the column experiments.

Reply: Thank you for your comments. The interaction results have been updated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 4: Discussions: Not in depth. There were some interactions between the treatments. You should explain the reasons why and what happened in the experiments.

Reply: Thank you for your critical comments. The discussion section has been improved in light of the comments received.

 

Comment 5: Comments on the Quality of English Language: Minor editing of English language is required.

Reply: The manuscript has been revised with the Paper Pal software and the English language errors have been rectified.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled "Effect of a slow-release urea nanofertilizer on soil microflora and yield of direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) " contains interesting research results for science and agricultural practice. The authors have performed a lot of research and obtained interesting results.   However, the text of the manuscript requires correction and supplementation. I have included detailed comments in the original text pdf.   

My general comments:   

explain whether these columns were placed in the experimental field how many seeds were sown in these columns   

add: nitrogen dose to keywords   

change the cited literature in accordance with the journal's requirements

correct the aim of the research (what you tested and what features, parameters)   provide the chemical composition of the fertilizers, what is the optimal dose,   do you have the chemical composition of the soil collected for research   if the columns were in the field, what about rainfall   after how many days (in what phase) was the experiment completed   

Place information about SPAD in another subsection   In the Results chapter, do not include references to literature if it is not necessary   Explain in the Material and Methods section what T1 ... T7 mean   

Can the number of decimal places in the tables be shortened?   Check statistical calculations in tables (comments in text pdf)   line 272 (Sindhura et al 2014)   Provide results of thousand seed weight   Provide statistically significant differences in figure 1   
In the Discussion section write missing research results, e.g. SPAD   In the Conclusion write what were the differences depending on the soil type   

Improve the list of references according to the journal requirements  

I hope that my comments will help the authors improve the text of the manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reviewer # 2:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors: The manuscript entitled "Effect of a slow-release urea nanofertilizer on soil microflora and yield of direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) " contains interesting research results for science and agricultural practice. The authors have performed a lot of research and obtained interesting results. However, the text of the manuscript requires correction and supplementation. I have included detailed comments in the original text pdf.

Reply: We sincerely thank you for your critical evaluation of the manuscript. Your constructive comments have been very useful in improving the overall quality of this manuscript.

 

 

My general comments:

Comment 1: Explain whether these columns were placed in the experimental field how many seeds were sown in these columns.

Reply: The details have been updated in the materials and methods section of the revised manuscript. Soil column studies did not involve sowing of the seeds. The columns were fabricated in an iron cage covered with asbestos sheet.

 

Comment 2: Add: nitrogen dose to keywords.

Reply: The suggested keyword has been included in the revised manuscript.

 

Comment 3: Change the cited literature in accordance with the journal's requirements.

Reply: The references have been formatted as per the style of the journal using Mendeley software.

Comment 4: Correct the aim of the research (what you tested and what features, parameters) provide the chemical composition of the fertilizers, what is the optimal dose, do you have the chemical composition of the soil collected for research. if the columns were in the field, what about rainfall   after how many days (in what phase) was the experiment completed.

Reply: The aim of the research has been revised. The chemical composition of the product has been provided in the M&M section of the revised manuscript. The optimal dose of the N-fertilizer in Punjab region of India is 150 kg N per hectare. The soil chemical composition of the samples utilized in column study and the field experiment have been included as Table S1 in revised supplementary file. The soil column study was performed in iron age enclosure with asbestos sheet roof covering to avoid any aberrant effects due to wind and rainfall. The soil column study was completed in 30 days.

   
Comment 5: Place information about SPAD in another subsection. In the Results chapter, do not include references to literature if it is not necessary   Explain in the Material and Methods section what T1 ... T7 mean.

Reply: The SPAD information has been moved to vegetative growth parameters. The references have been removed from the result section in the revised manuscript. The treatment details have been included in the revised supplementary file as Table S2.

Comment 6: Can the number of decimal places in the tables be shortened?  Check statistical calculations in tables (comments in text pdf) line 272 (Sindhura et al 2014).

Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. As desired the decimal places have been reduced in all tables.

 

Comment 7: Provide results of thousand seed weight. Provide statistically significant differences in Figure 1.

Reply: The thousand seed weight information has been depicted as Supplementary figure 2 in the revised manuscript. The figure 1 has been revised to indicate the significant differences among the treatments.  

 

Comment 8: In the Discussion section write missing research results, e.g. SPAD.

Reply: Thank you for indicating the missing details for few parameters. These have been updated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 9: In the Conclusion write what were the differences depending on the soil type.

Reply: The conclusion section has been revised with inclusion of results of the soil column of study.   

Comment 10: Improve the list of references according to the journal requirements. I hope that my comments will help the authors improve the text of the manuscript.

Reply: The references have been formatted as per the journal guidelines. We sincerely thank you for your constructive comments that have helped us to improve the technical merit of the manuscript.

Reply to intext comments of Reviewer 2:

 

Comment 1: Abstract: see 2.1. Soil column study

Reply: The results of the soil column study have been incorporated in the abstract of revised version of manuscript.

 

Comment 2: References should be numbered in order of appearance and indicated by a numeral or numerals in square brackets—e.g., [1] or [2,3], or [4–6].

Reply: The references have been formatted according to the journal guidelines.

 

Comment 3: Write exactly there were two nitrogen fertilizers, different doses, different soils and Soil column study

Reply: The last paragraph of the introduction section has been revised to include the suggested changes.

 

Comment 4: other parameters were also tested

Reply: The indicated lacuna has been rectified by inclusion of other parameters studied in the experiment.

 

Comment 5: OK but give the chemical composition

Reply: The chemical composition of the specimen has been incorporated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 6: If you have it, write down the chemical composition of the soil (pH, humus, etc.)

Reply: A new supplementary table 1 has been incorporated in the revised supplementary file depicting the chemical composition of the soil. 

 

Comment 7: Explain this, I understand that in field conditions. What about rain (precipitation)?

Reply: The desired details have been updated in the M&M section of the revised manuscript.

 

Comment 8: so what is the recommended dose of nitrogen? 100 kg per ha?

Reply: The recommended dose of nitrogen fertilizer is 150 kg N per hectare. This information has been provided in the Supplementary table 2.

 

Comment 9: Give the chemical composition of both fertilizers

Reply: The chemical composition has been provided in the M&M section of the revised manuscript.

 

Comment 10: After 30 days the experiment ended?

Reply: Yes, the soil column experiment was terminated after 30 days.

 

Comment 11: Is this still a column experiment (2.1. Soil column study) or a second field experiment?

Reply: This is the second experiment in which the rice plants were grown under field conditions.

 

Comment 12: sowing rate ?

Reply: Direct seeding at the rate of 25 kg per hectare was done. The same information has been updated in the revised manuscript.

 

Comment 13: grain yield and straw yield ?

Reply: Thank you for indicating it. Yes it represents both grain and straw yield.

 

Comment 14: SPAD is not that chapter

Reply: The indicated sentence has been moved to vegetative growth parameters section.

 

Comment 15: SPAD is not that chapter

Reply: The indicated sentence has been moved to vegetative growth parameters section.

 

Comment 16: This is the Results section, not the Discussion section.

Reply: Thank you for your critical observation. The references have been removed from results section.

 

Comment 17: Explain in the Material and Methods section the designation T1 ... T7

Reply: Thankyou for indicating the need for this aspect. A supplementary table 2 has been incorporated providing the details of the treatments.

 

Comment 18: Do you need this many decimal places?

Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. The decimal places have been removed for all values in all tables.

 

Comment 19: Check out these statistical calculations

Reply: The statistical calculations have been rechecked and found correct.

 

Comment 20: Explain what the lower case letters mean below the table 1.

Reply: Thank you for your critical comment. A footnote has been incorporated to provide the depiction of the alphabetic scripting in tables.

 

Comment 21: Check out these statistical calculations.

Reply: The statistical calculations have been rechecked and found correct.

 

Comment 22: Shorten decimal places in tables.

Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. The decimal places have been removed for all values in all tables.

 

Comment 23: Explain these symbols (Table 4)

Reply: Thank you for indicating the need for this aspect. A supplementary table 2 has been incorporated providing the details of the treatments.

 

Comment 24: Figure 1a to Figure 1

Reply: The desired change has been incorporated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 25: Thousand grain weight ?

Reply: The thousand grain weight information has been provided as supplementary Figure 2.

 

Comment 26: T7 is control?

Reply: Yes, T7 represents control treatment. The same information has been updated in the table at the indicated place.

 

Comment 27: Are these differences statistically significant? Figure 1

Reply: Thank you for indicating this error. The revised manuscript contains revised Figure 1 indicating the statistical variations among the treatments.

 

Comment 28: Put full form of Figure

Reply: The full form has been updated.

 

Comment 29: Discussion section: carotenoids and anthocyanin content  ? SPAD ? etc. describe missing results

Reply: The discussion section has been updated for the results of the missing parameters as indicated by you.

 

Comment 30: 2.1 Soil column study ? 2.2. Field study ?

Reply: The conclusion section has been revised to include the results of both soil column and field studies.

 

Comment 31: Thousand grain weight ?

Reply: The thousand grain weight information has been provided as supplementary Figure 2.

 

Comment 32: Write what the differences were between light, medium and heavy soil

Reply: As indicated by your goodself, this information has been updated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 33: References: Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, page range.

Reply: The references have been thoroughly revised and formatted as per your suggestions.

 

Comment 34: International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Research

Reply: The full name of the journal has been incorporated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Comment 35: 2887

Reply: The page information has been updated in the revised version of the manuscript.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a revised MS. The authors have corrected the reviewer's suggestions. Hence, it is recommended to be accepted in the current form.

Author Response

Reviewer 1:

This is a revised MS. The authors have corrected the reviewer's suggestions. Hence, it is recommended to be accepted in the current form.

Reply: We sincerely thank you for providing pertinent and valuable comments and constructive suggestions that have immensely helped us to improve the technical merit and discrete presentation of the results. We also thank you for your positive recommendation.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled "Effect of a slow-release urea nanofertilizer on soil microflora and yield of direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) " has been revised in accordance with my remarks and comments. I therefore recommend publication in the journal Nitrogen.

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

The manuscript entitled "Effect of a slow-release urea nanofertilizer on soil microflora and yield of direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) " has been revised in accordance with my remarks and comments. I therefore recommend publication in the journal Nitrogen.

Reply: Thank you for your positive recommendation. We also graciously thank you for the useful comments and suggestions that have helped us to improve the result presentation of the manuscript.