Improving Wheat Yield and Water-Use Efficiency by Optimizing Irrigations in Northern China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article explained two seasonal-field experiment that considers drought stresses, i.e., no irrigation (W0), irrigated in jointing (W1), both in jointing and flowering (W2) after the re-greening, and varieties (S086; J22). The following points are required to reconsider to improve the article.
1. Abstract of the article needs to revise with some technical parameters values. Some abbreviations used in abstract which one explained later in different sections.
2. The data for year, crop and duration were not briefed in abstract.
3. The number of irrigations in order to crop maturity needs to explain in the manuscript.
4. Some sections such as discussion explained with nonprofessional language and lack of literature.
5. Overall water deficit and comparison in terms of water saving didn’t explain in draft.
6. Some of the abbreviations missed to brief such as SOM, WUE, SWC and MDA
Need major improvement
Author Response
Reviewer 1:
This article explained two seasonal-field experiment that considers drought stresses, i.e., no irrigation (W0), irrigated in jointing (W1), both in jointing and flowering (W2) after the re-greening, and varieties (S086; J22). The following points are required to reconsider to improve the article.
- Abstract of the article needs to revise with some technical parameters values. Some abbreviations used in abstract which one explained later in different sections.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The abstract has been revised. For example, we added some technical values- For the water and irrigation water use efficiency, W1 was significantly increased by 20.6-21.7% and 38.3-39.3% in 2018-2019 and 23.4-24.4% and 43.8-44.7% in 2019-2020, respectively, as compared to W2 (line 23-25). And we revised the abbreviations used in abstract (e.g., line 20-21).
- The data for year, crop and duration were not briefed in abstract.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The related texts have been revised. For example, “we presented a two seasonal-field experiment (Oct 2018-June 2019 and Oct 2019-June 2020) that considers drought stresses, i.e., no irrigation (W0), irrigated in jointing (W1), both in jointing and flowering (W2) after the re-greening, and wheat varieties…” (line 17), “For the water and irrigation water use efficiency, W1 was significantly increased by 20.6-21.7% and 38.3-39.3% in 2018-2019 and 23.4-24.4% and 43.8-44.7% in 2019-2020, respectively, as compared to W2.” (line 23-25).
- The number of irrigations in order to crop maturity needs to explain in the manuscript.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The related texts have been revised in line 104-106.
- Some sections such as discussion explained with nonprofessional language and lack of literature.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The related texts have been revised in line 319-321, 328-333, etc.
- Overall water deficit and comparison in terms of water saving didn’t explain in draft.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. We have added some sentences to discuss the influence of different irrigation methods on wheat growth and physiology in line 330-333, 356-361, etc.
- Some of the abbreviations missed to brief such as SOM, WUE, SWC and MDA
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The abbreviations have been explained in the abstract (line 21-23), the note of table 1 (line 94-95) and conclusion (line 431).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
General:
This paper is nicely drafted and easy to read. However, due to the absence of a line number is hard to review.
Abstract:
Please conclude with the future implications of this study and how it will be helpful for researchers.
Introduction:
Please also highlight water stress and irrigation scheduling in other crops or at other locations and physiological aspects of water stress: Transpiration, and gas exchange, especially in the result section
(For example, for soybean: Jha, P. K., Kumar, S. N., & Ines, A. V. (2018). Responses of soybean to water stress and supplemental irrigation in upper Indo-Gangetic plain: Field experiment and modeling approach. Field crops research, 219, 76-86.)
The introduction needs more recent literature support, and the last para should mention the future implications of this study
M&M:
Location Map of the study area
Statistical analysis: missing
Discussion: I would suggest the authors have a more supported discussion with references considering the main point: The limitations of the method and considerations when to apply the studied methodology and then the potential next steps or further investigation to address these limitations.
Conclusion: Please highlight about future implications and challenges of this study.
References: Please double-check the style of references and if missing one
Moderate English editing is required
Author Response
Reviewer 2:
General:
This paper is nicely drafted and easy to read. However, due to the absence of a line number is hard to review.
Abstract:
Please conclude with the future implications of this study and how it will be helpful for researchers.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The related text has been revised into “Consequently, our study suggested that S086 variety combined with a total amount of irrigation water at 165 mm might be recommended to meet the win-win goal of high crop yield and water use efficiency for future reducing ground water depletion.” in line 28-31.
Introduction:
Please also highlight water stress and irrigation scheduling in other crops or at other locations and physiological aspects of water stress: Transpiration, and gas exchange, especially in the result section
(For example, for soybean: Jha, P. K., Kumar, S. N., & Ines, A. V. (2018). Responses of soybean to water stress and supplemental irrigation in upper Indo-Gangetic plain: Field experiment and modeling approach. Field crops research, 219, 76-86.)
The introduction needs more recent literature support, and the last para should mention the future implications of this study
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. We have carefully read the reference that you recommended to us and cited in the new version (line 68-69). In introduction, we added some sentences to explain the influence of water stress on crop yield, plant growth, gases emissions, etc. (line 70-73). And we revised the future implications of this study into “this knowledge will aid in the development of appropriate irrigation management strategies and selection of appropriative wheat varietiesin accord with the future agriculture goal in northern China” (line 82-84).
M&M:
Location Map of the study area
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. The location map was listed as follow, and added in the new version (Figure 1).
Statistical analysis: missing
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment. This part was separated from 2.3 section (line 175).
Discussion: I would suggest the authors have a more supported discussion with references considering the main point: The limitations of the method and considerations when to apply the studied methodology and then the potential next steps or further investigation to address these limitations.
ANSWER: Very thanks for your comment. We all think the big limitation of this study was the quantitative irrigation can not fit the real demands of water for plant growth because of the difference water inputs from rainfall among years. Accordingly, further studies are still required to evaluate the combination effects of appropriate irrigation water amount and rainfall on maintaining high wheat yield for future sustainable agriculture as well as the changes in the micro-environment (e.g., rhizosphere environment, microbial communities) of the winter wheat, and the interactions among plant physiology, root growth and microbes. And these related details have been added in line 416-427.
Conclusion: Please highlight about future implications and challenges of this study.
ANSWER: Very thanks for your comment. The related text has been revised in line 448-451.
References: Please double-check the style of references and if missing one
ANSWER: Very thanks for your comment. We have checked the references carfully.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
All critical comments are shown on the text using word tracking system
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
The English seems reasonable. However, it can be re-check lastly
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewer 3,
Thank you very much for your review, we have revised the manuscript according to your valuable comments. Please kindly see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The author s improved the suggestions and responded accordingly. Therefore, it is recommended the article may consider for further consideration.
Author Response
The author s improved the suggestions and responded accordingly. Therefore, it is recommended the article may consider for further consideration.
ANSWER: Thanks for your comment and relevant helps for our MS.
Reviewer 3 Report
All citical comments are almost done.
May be, lastly, it could be checked by a professional staff
Author Response
All citical comments are almost done.
ANSWER: Very thanks for your comments and relevant helps for improving our MS.
