Effect of the Spading Machine on Various Soil Parameters at Different Tillage Depths

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article presents a valuable contribution to the field of agriculture, overall well-structured and containing noteworthy experimental data. However, This article focuses on experimental testing and data listing. I think a stronger focus on theoretical analysis in the testing methods and results discussion sections would enhance its comprehensiveness. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #1

Dear reviewer:

            Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

Q	This article presents a valuable contribution to the field of agriculture, overall well-structured and containing noteworthy experimental data. However, This article focuses on experimental testing and data listing. I think a stronger focus on theoretical analysis in the testing methods and results discussion sections would enhance its comprehensiveness.
A	Needful done

 

We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is devoted to a very important and relevant topic: the influence of the shovel machine on various soil parameters at two different tillage depths.

Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?

Response: Yes.

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

Response: Yes.

Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

Response: Yes.

Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?

Response: I didn't see any discussion as such. It should be added.

For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?

Response: Yes.

Is the article adequately referenced?

Response: Of the 43 publications cited in the article, 24 articles are older than 10 years.

Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?

Response: The conclusion is very detailed and the main conclusions of this article should be left.

 

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #2

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

The article is devoted to a very important and relevant topic: the influence of the shovel machine on various soil parameters at two different tillage depths.

Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?

Response: Yes.

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

Response: Yes.

Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

Response: Yes.

Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?

Response: I didn't see any discussion as such. It should be added.

Answer: Needful done

For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?

Response: Yes.

Is the article adequately referenced?

Response: Of the 43 publications cited in the article, 24 articles are older than 10 years.

Answer: Few recent publications cited in the article as required.

Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?

Response: The conclusion is very detailed and the main conclusions of this article should be left.

 

 

We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

We hope that this article will continue to be revised with the following:

1、In Formula 2, the fonts of ρa and ρb are inconsistent with those of Lines 140 and 141.

2、Add a picture of the torque sensor installed on the PTO shaft.

3、In Section 2.3.1, add a table to show the working parameters in the test.

4、In Figure 2, the fonts are unified in upper and lower case.

In Line 279, the format of the figure 3 title is different as before.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #3

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

We hope that this article will continue to be revised with the following:

1、In Formula 2, the fonts of ρa and ρb are inconsistent with those of Lines 140 and 141.

Answer: Needful done

2、Add a picture of the torque sensor installed on the PTO shaft.

Answer: Figure 2 inserted (Line 164)

3、In Section 2.3.1, add a table to show the working parameters in the test.

Answer : Table 2 inserted as required (Line 110)

4、In Figure 2, the fonts are unified in upper and lower case.

In Line 279, the format of the figure 3 title is different as before.

Answer: Corrected

 We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study was carried out to investigate the effect of depth of tillage on soil parameters. The spading machine was evaluated for two independent parameters: soil type and depth of cut. This paper has certain research significance. Here are some opinions and suggestions for the article.

1) In section 2.2, there needs to be a close-up of the machine's operating components, displaying the soil touching part of the implement.

2) Speed is a relatively important parameter, and it is recommended to increase the impact of the forward speed of the implement and the speed of the spades on the effect.

3) Provide a brief introduction to several calculation methods in this sentence. “The cost of operation was determined as per BIS ) Bureau of Indian Standards) code IS (Indian Standards) 9164 (Zachariah, 1979). The cost of operation was estimated after incorporating fixed and variable costs of individual steps. Cost analyses were carried out using the straight-line method of depreciation (Hunt, 2001).”

4)The size of Figure 2 is too small and unclear.

5) A more detailed description of the data in Figure 2 is required, while also conducting in-depth analysis of the results.

6) Please check if there is any logical error in this sentence, and if it should be that S3 is stronger than S1 and S2.

7) What is‘the unique movement of patches’in this sentence. This kind of expression is not rigorous and standardized, please express it clearly. This expression is not rigorous and standardized, please express it clearly This results in over-pulverization by rotavator, which disturbs the soil ecosystem by damaging soil-friendly organisms like earthworms etc. (Blouin et al, 2013), whereas in spading machines due to the unique movement of spades in soil causes lesser damage to the soil ecosystem.

8) Please modify the two data colors to more easily distinguishable colors in Figure 3.

9）Please explain this sentence in more detail. That is to explain what "lower field efficiency observed during the experience" means. Loamy Sand soil offers the least soil resistance but shows higher fuel consumption than sandy loam soil, which was due to lower field efficiency observed during the experiment as well as same result was also reported by Oduma (2018).

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #2

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

This study was carried out to investigate the effect of depth of tillage on soil parameters. The spading machine was evaluated for two independent parameters: soil type and depth of cut. This paper has certain research significance. Here are some opinions and suggestions for the article.

• In section 2.2, there needs to be a close-up of the machine's operating components, displaying the soil touching part of the implement.

Answer: Fig 2 inserted as showing the working of the machine

 

• Speed is a relatively important parameter, and it is recommended to increase the impact of the forward speed of the implement and the speed of the spades on the effect.

Answer: Actually, in the current experiment we have fixed the operating speed. We appreciate your suggestion and try to conduct different experiment using this suggestion.

 

• Provide a brief introduction to several calculation methods in this sentence. “The cost of operation was determined as per BIS ) Bureau of Indian Standards) code IS (Indian Standards) 9164 (Zachariah, 1979). The cost of operation was estimated after incorporating fixed and variable costs of individual steps. Cost analyses were carried out using the straight-line method of depreciation (Hunt, 2001).”

Answer: Added in equation 6.

4)The size of Figure 2 is too small and unclear.

Answer: Needful done in the Figure 2 (Now figure 3, Line 235).    

5) A more detailed description of the data in Figure 2 is required, while also conducting in-depth analysis of the results.

Answer: we have more detailed the discussion part between line 220 -323.

6) Please check if there is any logical error in this sentence, and if it should be that S3 is stronger than S1 and S2.

Answer: We didn’t found any error, if it is necessary please mention.

7) What is‘the unique movement of patches’in this sentence. This kind of expression is not rigorous and standardized, please express it clearly. This expression is not rigorous and standardized, please express it clearly This results in over-pulverization by rotavator, which disturbs the soil ecosystem by damaging soil-friendly organisms like earthworms etc. (Blouin et al, 2013), whereas in spading machines due to the unique movement of spades in soil causes lesser damage to the soil ecosystem.

Answer: Needful done in the manuscript

8) Please modify the two data colors to more easily distinguishable colors in Figure 3.

Answer: Corrected as required (Now Fig 4, Line 295)

9）Please explain this sentence in more detail. That is to explain what "lower field efficiency observed during the experience" means. Loamy Sand soil offers the least soil resistance but shows higher fuel consumption than sandy loam soil, which was due to lower field efficiency observed during the experiment as well as same result was also reported by Oduma (2018).

Answer: Needfully discussion has been added

We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper mainly introduces the effect of the spading machine on various soil parameters at different tillage depths. The research conclusions have certain reference significance for relevant projects. However, there are some problems in this paper, which can be modified and improved by the author.

1.The text format of the figure name in Figure 2 is incorrect and does not need to be bolded.

2. For the writing of symbols, the format is italic, and its corner marks are regular, and the format should be uniformly modified.

3. The quality of some pictures in the text needs to be improved (the font is too small to obtain effective information), such as Fig.2 in the text.

4. The format of the figure numbers in the article are different, such as Figure 2 and Fig 3. Please unify them as Figure or Fig.

5. The figure number in Figure 3 is not bolded.

6. The author has done a good job in data processing and analysis, and can clearly see the changes of various parameters under different tillage depths. However, these changes are not discussed or explained in depth.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

This paper mainly introduces the effect of the spading machine on various soil parameters at different tillage depths. The research conclusions have certain reference significance for relevant projects. However, there are some problems in this paper, which can be modified and improved by the author.

1.The text format of the figure name in Figure 2 is incorrect and does not need to be bolded.

2. For the writing of symbols, the format is italic, and its corner marks are regular, and the format should be uniformly modified.

3. The quality of some pictures in the text needs to be improved (the font is too small to obtain effective information), such as Fig.2 in the text.

4. The format of the figure numbers in the article are different, such as Figure 2 and Fig 3. Please unify them as Figure or Fig.

5. The figure number in Figure 3 is not bolded.

6. The author has done a good job in data processing and analysis, and can clearly see the changes of various parameters under different tillage depths. However, these changes are not discussed or explained in depth.

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #5

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

This paper mainly introduces the effect of the spading machine on various soil parameters at different tillage depths. The research conclusions have certain reference significance for relevant projects. However, there are some problems in this paper, which can be modified and improved by the author.

1.The text format of the figure name in Figure 2 is incorrect and does not need to be bolded.

Answer: Needful done in the Figure 2 (Now figure 3, Line 235).    

2. For the writing of symbols, the format is italic, and its corner marks are regular, and the format should be uniformly modified.

Answer: Required action incorporated

3. The quality of some pictures in the text needs to be improved (the font is too small to obtain effective information), such as Fig.2 in the text.

Answer: Needful done in the Figure 2 (Now figure 3, Line 235).    

4. The format of the figure numbers in the article are different, such as Figure 2 and Fig 3. Please unify them as Figure or Fig.

Answer: Required action incorporated

5. The figure number in Figure 3 is not bolded.

Answer: Required action incorporated

We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1、The article provides detailed information about the soil condition, location, and climate of the test area. However, there are too few soil types in the test area in the article, and whether the soil quality of the test area is representative of the local area can be considered to add a few types of test plots with different soil quality to make the experiment more convincing.

2、In 2.2, only the shovel is emphasized and the other tools for the experiment are not mentioned, please add more details about the other tools. The introduction of the shovel is too much and does not focus on the part of the text related to the experiment.

3、Adjust the size of the font in Figures 1 and 2.

4、Add the regression equation corresponding to each picture in Figure 2. (Please elaborate on whether there is a regression relationship in each variable)

5、Add a detailed description of Table 2 to make it easier for the reader to understand.

6、In Table 3, the harrower is compared with various major tillage implements, but the experimental results for the other implements are based on the results within the references, and please describe in detail whether the results are representative of the averages of their implements and whether the results obtained are representative.

7、Please add soil particle size intervals suitable for tillage in 3.3.

 

 

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #2

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

1、The article provides detailed information about the soil condition, location, and climate of the test area. However, there are too few soil types in the test area in the article, and whether the soil quality of the test area is representative of the local area can be considered to add a few types of test plots with different soil quality to make the experiment more convincing.

Answer: needful done

2、In 2.2, only the shovel is emphasized and the other tools for the experiment are not mentioned, please add more details about the other tools. The introduction of the shovel is too much and does not focus on the part of the text related to the experiment.

Answer: needful done

3、Adjust the size of the font in Figures 1 and 2.

Answer: Required action done

4、Add the regression equation corresponding to each picture in Figure 2. (Please elaborate on whether there is a regression relationship in each variable)

Answer: needful done

5、Add a detailed description of Table 2 to make it easier for the reader to understand.

Answer: needful done

6、In Table 3, the harrower is compared with various major tillage implements, but the experimental results for the other implements are based on the results within the references, and please describe in detail whether the results are representative of the averages of their implements and whether the results obtained are representative.

7、Please add soil particle size intervals suitable for tillage in 3.3.

Answer: it may depend upon the soil and other variables.

We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Reviewer 7 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Editor; 

You find enclosed my comments about the revision of Manuscript Number sustainability-2900497 entitled " Effect of the spading machine on various soil parameters at different tillage depths”

In this study, the authors investigate  the effect of depth of tillage on soil parameters using a spading machine. The authors used both dependent and independent parameters to evaluate and demonstrate the effect of depth of tillage.

Overall the methodological approaches used lead to results that are fairly well exploited in the interpretations.

Moreover, the redaction of the paper still requires amelioration in order to valorize this work.  

My comments are listed as follows:

 

 (Title) : You need to change the title. Here is a suggestion: “Effect of depth of tillage on soil parameters using a spading machine”

(Abstarct):

-        Lines 19-22 : You need to review the style of writing these sentences. Present the results in correct and independent sentences. Avoid succession by semicolons (;)!

(Introduction)

-        Lines 62-68 : “ Due to…..soil”: Support this data with bibliographic references.

(Results and discussion):

Here are some comments and questions:

- The discussion is very poor; It is desirable to add other elements to compare the results of the evaluation with other previous ones.

- Do you think that the evaluation of the parameters would be more useful and meaningful before and after planting of crops used and not before and after tillage? if so, support the discussion with related elements ?

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

No comments

Author Response

Reply to comments received from Reviewer #7

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for your continued support to improve our paper. We have taken your recommendations into consideration and made necessary modifications and improvements. The table below presents each comment and our reply/action taken.

 

Dear Editor; 

You find enclosed my comments about the revision of Manuscript Number sustainability-2900497 entitled " Effect of the spading machine on various soil parameters at different tillage depths”

In this study, the authors investigate  the effect of depth of tillage on soil parameters using a spading machine. The authors used both dependent and independent parameters to evaluate and demonstrate the effect of depth of tillage.

Overall the methodological approaches used lead to results that are fairly well exploited in the interpretations.

Moreover, the redaction of the paper still requires amelioration in order to valorize this work.  

My comments are listed as follows:

 

 (Title) : You need to change the title. Here is a suggestion: “Effect of depth of tillage on soil parameters using a spading machine”

(Abstarct):

-        Lines 19-22 : You need to review the style of writing these sentences. Present the results in correct and independent sentences. Avoid succession by semicolons (;)!

Answer: needful done

 

(Introduction)

-        Lines 62-68 : “ Due to…..soil”: Support this data with bibliographic references.

Answer: needful done

(Results and discussion):

Here are some comments and questions:

- The discussion is very poor; It is desirable to add other elements to compare the results of the evaluation with other previous ones.

Answer: needful done

- Do you think that the evaluation of the parameters would be more useful and meaningful before and after planting of crops used and not before and after tillage? if so, support the discussion with related elements ?

 

Answer: Yes we completely agree with your thoughts, eventually we are working on the same in another experiment. But at this point we are limited on the tillage performance only.

 

 We sincerely hope that our revised version of the manuscript and our answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It can be accept in the current version.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It can be accept in the current version.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

 Thank you so much for your decision.

Regards,

 

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author did not give a good answer to the questions I raised, and I did not see obvious corrections in the text.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for carefully reading our paper and providing your constructive feedback and suggestions to improve our research work. We have taken all your recommendations on board and made necessary modifications and improvements. We are addressing in details your comments; we set the comment’s text followed by our response in the attached file.

 

1	The article provides detailed information about the soil condition, location, and climate of the test area. However, there are too few soil types in the test area in the article, and whether the soil quality of the test area is representative of the local area can be considered to add a few types of test plots with different soil quality to make the experiment more convincing.	The reviewer comments are highly appreciated, yes it definitely convincing to add some more soil test plots. For this author are planning a separate experiment. However, in this manuscript we are restricted to three soil types only.
2	In 2.2, only the shovel is emphasized and the other tools for the experiment are not mentioned, please add more details about the other tools. The introduction of the shovel is too much and does not focus on the part of the text related to the experiment.	We think reviewer using “Shovel” instead of “Spades”, we have added line 100 to 103 which illustrating the arrangement and working of the spades.
3	Adjust the size of the font in Figures 1 and 2	Needful done with Fig 1 and 2 (Now figure 3) Line 237
4	Add the regression equation corresponding to each picture in Figure 2. (Please elaborate on whether there is a regression relationship in each variable)	Added in line no. 172
5	Add a detailed description of Table 2 to make it easier for the reader to understand.	Needful done please see line 224 to 229
6	In Table 3, the harrower is compared with various major tillage implements, but the experimental results for the other implements are based on the results within the references, and please describe in detail whether the results are representative of the averages of their implements and whether the results obtained are representative.	The results shown in the table 3 are representative only
7	Please add soil particle size intervals suitable for tillage in 3.3	Soil particle size intervals are not determined at the time of experiments. However I think it may depend upon the successive crop for which the seedbed is preparing. So at this stage we thank it is not possible to determine the soil particle size intervals suitable for tillage.

 

We sincerely hope that our revised version and answers to your comments/queries satisfy your concerns.

 

 

Round 3

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I don't have any other questions.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

          Thank you so much for carefully reading our paper and providing a positive decision.

Regards,