The Effect of Rotational Cropping of Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) on Rhizosphere Soil Microbial Communities
, Chao Fan 1,3,†, Hongmei Yuan 2, Guangwen Wu 2, Jing Sun 2 and Shuquan Zhang 2,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The effect of rotational cropping of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) on rhizosphere soil microbial communities
After searching I found the following published article (:
Guo, L.; Chen, X.; Li, Z.; Wang, M.; Che, Y.; Zhang, L.; Jiang, Z.; Jie, S. Effects of Continuous Cropping on Bacterial Community and Diversity in Rhizosphere Soil of Industrial Hemp: A Five-Year Experiment. Diversity 2022, 14, 250. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14040250
The main problem in the MS is the experimental design: is totally absent and not clear???
When did the author cultivated these 4 plants or crops? Where the time table of the cultivation during the 3 years??? where the rotation for each one? When did the author start and harvest of each crop? What is the area of each plot? Where the cultivation practices especially fertilization and irrigation? How did the author take the soil samples to from the rhizosphere?
Where the changes in soil parameters especially in soil pH and salinity (if any) after the cultivation and during the
The “Figure 2. Effects of soil physicochemical properties.” Is not enough to monitor an experiment during 3 years and 4 cultivated crops???
To what extend the author control the plant disease for the experiment during the 3 years?
This not accepted MS in my opinion
Author Response
Point 1: When did the author cultivated these 4 plants or crops?
Response 1: We are very sorry for our negligence of this detail. We have included a more detailed experimental design (marked in red, lines 112-118).
Point 2: Where the time table of the cultivation during the 3 years???
Response 2: The time table has been added in the revised manuscript (Table S2).
Point 3: where the rotation for each one?
Response 3: Experiments were conducted at the Modern Agriculture Demonstration Area (45°49'44''N, 126°48'55''E), located at the southern bank of the Songhua River, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province.
Point 4: When did the author start and harvest of each crop?
Response 4: Information about start and harvest of the crops has been added to Table S2.
Point 5: What is the area of each plot?
Response 5: Each crop is planted in a greenhouse. Each greenhouse is 60 m long, 12 m wide. The area is 720 m2 for each plot. This information has been added to the methods section (lines 106-107).
Point 6: Where the cultivation practices especially fertilization and irrigation?
Response 6: The base fertilizer is N:P:K=15:15:15, 25 kg per greenhouse. The fertilizer was mixed with the soil before planting the crops. No additional fertilizer was used in the crop growing stage. Sub-membrane irrigation was used for planting. Rational irrigation was carried out according to the actual water demand of the different crops. This information has been added to the methods section (lines 122-126).
Point 7: How did the author take the soil samples to from the rhizosphere?
Response 7: This information has been added in the revised manuscript (lines 139-145).
Point 8: Where the changes in soil parameters especially in soil pH and salinity (if any) after the cultivation and during the industrial hemp.
Response 8: We were sorry that we only measured the soil pH, but not the salinity. We measured the pH before the start of the experiment, and after the harvest each year. We found that there was no different among the three years (Figure 2A of the revised manuscript).
Point 9: The “Figure 2. Effects of soil physicochemical properties.” Is not enough to monitor an experiment during 3 years and 4 cultivated crops???
Response 9: The changes of the soil physicochemical properties were not significant among the different treatments. Thus, we speculated that soil microorganisms have a greater impact on industrial hemp fusarium wilt.
Point 10: To what extend the author control the plant disease for the experiment during the 3 years?
Response 10: No pest or disease control were applied and weeding was performed manually during the whole experiment. We have added this information in the revised manuscript (lines 121-122).
Reviewer 2 Report
Minor observations are listed below:
We suggest to use plant mortality instead of morbidity all over the manuscript (line 19, line 343).
Line 29-31: instead to controlling soil-borne pathogenic disease and increasing floral and leas yields of industrial hemp, please use to control soil borne pathogenic disease and increase floral yields.
Line 72: in this study is not necessarily
Line 79-81: the last sentence of introduction is about results achieved. Please delete.
Line 100-101: please correct potatoes to potato, and beans to bean
Line 112: please write with small caps fusarium wild
Line 145: please indicate the concentration of Taq polimerase used (U/ul) not only the quantity
Line 380: change rhizobium with Rhizobium
Author Response
Point 1: We suggest to use plant mortality instead of morbidity all over the manuscript (line 19, line 343).
Response 1: We appreciate your suggestion. We have replaced plant morbidity with plant mortality in the revised manuscript.
Point 2: Line 29-31: instead to controlling soil-borne pathogenic disease and increasing floral and leas yields of industrial hemp, please use to control soil borne pathogenic disease and increase floral yields.
Response 2: Thank you and this has been changed as you suggested (line 30).
Point 3: Line 72: in this study is not necessarily
Response 3: It has been deleted.
Point 4: Line 79-81: the last sentence of introduction is about results achieved. Please delete.
Response 4: Thank you and we have deleted this sentence.
Point 5: Line 100-101: please correct potatoes to potato, and beans to bean
Response 5: We have corrected these words and marked in red (Lines 110-111).
Point 6: Line 112: please write with small caps fusarium wild
Response 6: Thank you and this has been corrected.
Point 7: Line 145: please indicate the concentration of Taq polimerase used (U/ul) not only the quantity
Response 7: This has been added (line 168).
Point 8: Line 380: change rhizobium with Rhizobium
Response 8: Corrected.
Reviewer 3 Report
Overall, this is an interesting study conducted by Tang et al., to study the effect of rotational cropping of industrial hemp on rhizosphere soil microbial communities. I think the research question is interesting. However, the way the results ae discussed in the manuscript needs major rework. I hope the authors find these comments and suggestions helpful. I suggest major revisions before this manuscript is acceptable for publication. I have clearly indicated all my opinions and suggestions below.
Major Comments:
What is the hypothesis of your research? Are these rotations common in industrial hemp production systems? Justify.
Discussion: The whole discussion section lacks substance. Please try to address these questions. Why was this research conducted? What in the relevance of rotational effect on microbial community diversity? How does this research benefit industrial hemp cultivation?
Author Response
Point 1: What is the hypothesis of your research? Are these rotations common in industrial hemp production systems? Justify.
Response 1: Crop rotations are common in agricultural practice, but not in industrial hemp production. Based on others and our own previous studies (reference 13-16), we hypothesized that rotation systems could decrease the incidence of industrial hemp fusarium wilt disease by increasing plant-beneficial microorganisms and inhibiting the pathogen population. The introduction section has been revised to better justify our current research.
Point 2: Discussion: The whole discussion section lacks substance. Please try to address these questions. Why was this research conducted? What in the relevance of rotational effect on microbial community diversity? How does this research benefit industrial hemp cultivation?
Response 2: The discussion section had been revised extensively as you suggested. All revisions are marked in red. We hope our revisions will meet the publication requirements.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
thanks for adding the missing parts!
Reviewer 3 Report
I see that the authors have addressed most my the comments and suggestions.
