Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript contains valuable research material, especially in a regional context. However, it should be substantially revised before publication. I suggest changing the title of the paper to emphasize the regional practical importance of the research. The Materials and Methods chapter needs some changes and additions, while the Results chapter and then the Discussion chapter should be thoroughly rebuilt. Conclusions should not go beyond the findings of the research presented.

I have included detailed comments directly in the manuscript, which is attached.

I hope my suggestions will help Authors improve the article in terms of content and form.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for your nice comments. We appreciate your efforts and time. Please find the responses to your valuable comments in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is relatively well written, but the layout contains a large number of typographical errors. These should be removed (L 39, L176 - in CF?). Furthermore, the modification of the units. There are many errors such as t/ha or missing superscripts. It is therefore necessary to go through the whole text, tables and graphs carefully and to unify the units.

2.1 Materials and methods

What was the composition of the manure? Nutrient content, C:N ratio? How was the manure incorporated into the soil and when? Immediately before sowing or earlier? Manure has a higher C:N content compared to slurry and takes longer to mineralise.

2.2. Materials and methods

A complete description of the soil analysis is missing. On which soil type was the experiment carried out? Table 2. Why?

2.3. Materials and methods

ANOVA is a very common method, probably suitable for your experiment. However, this method requires certain conditions to be met. First of all, normal distribution of data and homogeneity of variance. Mention of these tests (which ones were used?) and their results are missing. If these conditions are not met, other, non-parametric tests should be used. The choice of test significantly affects the results.

Figure 3.

What does it mean that SPAD represents Soil-Plant Analysis Development? The SPAD is used to measure the chlorophyll level in the leaves, isn't it?

L401 - 404. You haven't analysed the data. Therefore, it would be useful to add citations to the papers that have examined it.

The experiments appear to be reasonably designed and evaluated from a methodological point of view (if the problems with the statistical analysis are solved, see above). Although the paper does not present surprising results, these results and findings are important not only in the conditions of the country in which the experiment was conducted, but also in other territories. I applaud the efforts to mitigate the application of mineral fertilizers, and especially the application of manure fertilizers, which have a positive impact on soil properties and sustainable agricultural production.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your nice comments. We appreciate your efforts and time. Please find the responses to your valuable comments in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thank the authors for the changes made to the manuscript. It was greatly improved. However, one of the most important suggestions was not incorporated.

I do not agree with the authors' opinion that presenting differences in relative values (here percentages) makes the discussion of the results clearer and promotes understanding of the relationship. his function is not fulfilled, especially when insignificant differences are highlighted in this way (a statistically insignificant change can be large when expressed in relative numbers). In addition, the text becomes unnecessarily long, which does not make it any easier to read. The discussion of the results should primarily indicate which treatments did not result in a change in a given trait (no differences from the control), and which improved or worsened it, ultimately aiming to indicate which treatment was most beneficial. In my opinion, such a way of analysis would be more transparent and certainly more concise.

Of course, I do not deny that the tables show the significance of the factors and the differences between the means. Therefore, I do not request rejection of the paper for not improving the analysis of the results, but strongly recommend the introduction of the suggested changes. The final decision is left to the editors.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. Please find the response to your comments in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

# Reviewer 2

No.	Comment	Response
1	The article is relatively well written, but the layout contains a large number of typographical errors. These should be removed (L 39, L176 - in CF?). Furthermore, the modification of the units. There are many errors such as t/ha or missing superscripts. It is therefore necessary to go through the whole text, tables and graphs carefully and to unify the units.	Thank you very much for your valuable comment. The errors has solved. The CF is abbreviated of Chemical Fertilizer in Table. The unit t/ha is corrected as ton/ha in the whole manuscript.
2	2.1 Materials and methods What was the composition of the manure? Nutrient content, C:N ratio? How was the manure incorporated into the soil and when? Immediately before sowing or earlier? Manure has a higher C:N content compared to slurry and takes longer to mineralize.	In this study, the C:N ratio did not consider. Apparently, thank you very much such as valuable comment and we will consider it in the next experiments. New information regarding to the application time of animal manure added to the line 129.
3	2.2. Materials and methods A complete description of the soil analysis is missing. On which soil type was the experiment carried out? Table 2. Why?	Thank you for your nice comment. All the soil characteristics mentioned in the Table 2. Including soil type which was silty loam.
4	2.3. Materials and methods ANOVA is a very common method, probably suitable for your experiment. However, this method requires certain conditions to be met. First of all, normal distribution of data and homogeneity of variance. Mention of these tests (which ones were used?) and their results are missing. If these conditions are not met, other, non-parametric tests should be used. The choice of test significantly affects the results.	Thank you for your comment. The method one-way anova mentioned in the statistical analysis section. However, in all results shown in this study showed the significance rate based on the anova result with its respective Tukey post hock test by letters.
5	Figure 3. What does it mean that SPAD represents Soil-Plant Analysis Development? The SPAD is used to measure the chlorophyll level in the leaves, isn't it?	Thank you very much for your nice comment. The information in line 304 regarding to the SPAD has been solved.
6	L401 - 404. You haven't analyzed the data. Therefore, it would be useful to add citations to the papers that have examined it.	Thank you very much for your comment. Apparently, we did not represent any data in the conclusion section which need to be analyzed.

No. 1. Correctly, it should be t ha⁻¹. But in some other articles the authors use t/ha. The editor will have to sort this out.

The highest plant height in experiment I at 45 178 DAS was 75% + AMLD in CF, followed by CF treatment.

Are you sure this sentence is ok?

No. 3. I know there is a Table 2. But how did you analyze the soil? Mehlich III, aqua regia…Why is Ca in %?

No. 4. I know you have used ANOVA. However, before using ANOVA, additional tests should be performed to answer the question of whether you can use ANOVA at all. Consider this question closed.

No. 6.

Furthermore, the application of organic fertilizers will provide more essential nutrients to plants, increase nutrient availability by reducing pH, and improve soil physical properties and biological fertility.

This is the sentence I was pointing out. You say all sorts of things can happen if you apply manure to the soil. But you're naming things that you haven't analysed in your work. Therefore, this sentence should be accompanied by citations that prove it.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. Please find the response to your comments in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf