Alternative Cover Crops and Soil Management Practices Modified the Macronutrients, Enzymes Activities, and Soil Microbial Diversity of Rainfed Olive Orchards (cv. Chetoui) under Mediterranean Conditions in Tunisia
, Julio Antonio Calero González 4, Sofiane Abdelhamid 1, Roberto Garcia-Ruiz 3 and Hechmi Chehab 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors studied the effects of cover crops on macronutrients, enzyme activities and soil microbial diversity in rainfed olive orchards. They found cover crops increased soil organic matter, nutrient levels, enzyme activities and soil microbial diversity. After reading this manuscript, I think this manuscript is in immature stage. More attention should be paid on the effects of cover crops and soil managements on growth, nutrients and other biological properties of olive plantations. How soil managements influence macronutrients, soil enzyme activities and properties? Moreover, it is hard to analyze the effects of cover crop and soil managements on the soil enzyme activities and microbial diversity due to the low resolution of all figures.
Specific comments.
1. Line 21: crop should be crops. Line 34: prove should be proves or proved.
2. Figure 1, 2 low resolution
3. Soil properties should be in a single subtitle as soil functional quality.
4. Resolution of all figures are low. It is difficult to get information. Please redraw all figures.
5. The title: soil managements modified…..in abstract, I am curious that how soil managements influence the crop growth or soil properties?
6. Line 1337: increased the biomass production as compared to… biomass of olive or cover crops?
7. Table 1 soil N P K contents. It should be displayed as total N, available P and K contents.
8. English should be polished.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
English should be polished.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this manuscript, the authors evaluated the short-term (two cropping seasons 2021 and 2022) effects of different seeded cover crops and soil management practices on the cover crops and soil characteristics, as well as enzymes activities and microbial diversity. This study contains a lot of research work and data, provides new insights and data support for the application of cover crop to enhance soil quality of olive ecosystem. The research topic falls within the aims and scopes of the journal and would be of interests to the journal audiences. Several concerns on the manuscript as follow.
Abstract: Further highlight the innovation of this study. Line20-21 “But, in Tunisia a few studies were investigated the effect of cover crop on the olive productivity.” Your research did not include the olive productivity, and there was no data on the yield or quality of olive oil.
Introduction:
1. Crop production is often mentioned in the introduction, but the manuscript lacks relevant data. Additional data on olive yield and quality are recommended.
2. Add some introduction about mixed sowing. Add some explanation about the selection of cover crop varieties.
Materials and Methods
1. LINE302-305 Lack of the seeding rate of cover crops, as well as specific sowing methods.
2. LINE310 ploughing depth?
3. LINE455 Please add the method of multiple comparison and normality test.
Results
1. Improve the clarity of the figures.
2. LINE691 The soil N content of the control treatment in 2022 does not correspond to the Table1.
Discussion
The discussion lacks the comparation among different cover crops, especially the detailed explanation of mechanisms. Further highlight the discussion of the innovative results of this research. Line 1190-1192 Please explain more and add some support.
Conclusion
1. LINE1337-1338 “cover crop diversity increased the biomass production as compared to monoculture and spontaneous vegetation.” In fig3, the dry biomass of the mixture of Vetch-Oat was significantly lower than that of Oat monoculture. Your conclusion is inconsistent with the result.
2. It can be further suggested which system is the best to improve the soil quality of the olive ecosystem.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments for author File: Comments.pdf
The English Language needs to be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript evaluates some cover crops (wheat, vetch, oat, fenugreek, mixture vetch-oat and spontaneous vegetation) compared to a control (tillage) in olive orchard with a different biomass usage during the two years of experimentation. The results of biomass produced /incorporated and soil nutrients were accompanied by soil enzymatic activities and microbial catabolic diversity results. The topic is interesting and the results are enriched by the soil enzymatic activities and microbial catabolic diversity data. It may be accepted after minor revisions.
In general, the Authors should carefully recheck the manuscript for some errors. Some specific comments are reported below:
L 26: Perhaps “intercropping” could be mistaken because a mixture of Vetch-Oat was also used in the experiment. The Authors should rephrase.
L 110: Is 196,000 tons of production per year or as total production between 2015 and 2019? In the second case, it contrasts to the previous data 193,700 t per year. Please, clarify, it seems to be contradictory.
L 231-232: It would be better to clarify the sentence. As it is written, the sentence seems to inform that the Authors found the mentioned enzymes
L 257: Perhaps the Authors can put between brackets the orchard layout instead of the density since they are speaking about tree density in the test.
L 308: When and how, in 2021, the residues were incorporated into the soil? Immediately after harvest? By ploughing?
L1187: Perhaps “P fixed” is not the most appropriate terminology.
L 1191: the statement “the exudates produced make soil phosphorus more available to the cover crops” needs an appropriate recent reference.
L 1337: The statement “cover crop diversity increased the biomass production as compared to monoculture and spontaneous vegetation” seems to contrast with the results from lines 462-463 and 465-466. Perhaps it would be better to rephrase for clarity.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease ensure font consistency in all figures.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. You gave the seeding amount not seeding rate.
2. While data on olive and quality will be included and discussed in new research paper in future，those data are important to assess the feasibility of the managements. Please add.
3. The discussion needs further improvement.
4. The amount of wording duplication in the manuscript was high, please modify.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author have made improvement for the manuscript. But crop production and quality could be include to fully assay the feasibiliy of the managements.
Author Response
please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
