Combined Application of Inorganic and Organic Phosphorous with Inoculation of Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria Improved Productivity, Grain Quality and Net Economic Returns of Pearl Millet (Pennisetum glaucum [L.] R. Br.)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors, your work is of scientific interest and has a good data set, but raises some questions, the answers to which can significantly improve your manuscript.
1. What types of soils were used in your experiment?
2. Fig.1 Why are data expressed in different units of measurement shown on the same scale? How legitimate is this?
3. Fig.1 values ​​for Rainfall (mm) Sunshine (hr) are presented as continuous lines, but these are average values, so it is better to replace them with discrete values.
4. The title of Table 1 "Soil physical and chemical properties of experiment location prior to the initiation of exper-iment" is not entirely correct. If the experiment lasted 2020-2021, then how can 2021 be before the start of the experiment?
5. Why is there no statistical data in table 1 (value variation)?
6. In section 2.3. Crop Husbandry, you write that the experiment was carried out in 2020-2021 (104, 105), and this chapter describes only one year of the experiment, or are the actions and terms of sowing and harvesting for 2020 and 2021 completely identical?
7. Line 194 - all conditions followed according to [45]. Add a method name.
8. For tables 2 - 9, give a more detailed explanation of the data and symbols within the table.
Author Response
Reviewer 1 Comments
Comment 1. What types of soils were used in your experiment?
Response: The soil belonged to Sindhlianwali soil series (fine silty, mixed, hyperthermic, sodichaplocambids in USDA classification).Comment 2. Fig.1 Why are data expressed in different units of measurement shown on the same scale? How legitimate is this?
Response: The figure has been replaced with new one where all the weather attributes are presented separately
Comment 3. Fig.1 values for Rainfall (mm) Sunshine (hr) are presented as continuous lines, but these are average values, so it is better to replace them with discrete values.
Response: The figure has been changed to bar graph.
Comment 4. The title of Table 1 "Soil physical and chemical properties of experiment location prior to the initiation of experiment" is not entirely correct. If the experiment lasted 2020-2021, then how can 2021 be before the start of the experiment?
Response: The experiment was not continuous from 2020-2021 because 1st year experiment was started in June 2020 and ended in October 2020. Then 2nd year experiment was started in June 2021 and ended in October 2021.
Comment 5. Why is there no statistical data in table 1 (value variation)?
Response: Table 1 contain report of soil analysis taken from experiment for 2020 and 2021 prior to start of research. These are properties of soil sample so they don’t need any statistical analysis.
Comment 6. In section 2.3. Crop Husbandry, you write that the experiment was carried out in 2020-2021 (104, 105), and this chapter describes only one year of the experiment, or are the actions and terms of sowing and harvesting for 2020 and 2021 completely identical?
Response: This article had data of two year research. Similar, production technology and treatments repeated for 2020 and 2021.
Comment 7. Line 194 - all conditions followed according to [45]. Add a method name.
Response: Correction has been made as per suggestion.
Comment 8. For tables 2 - 9, give a more detailed explanation of the data and symbols within the table.
Response: Correction has been made as per suggestion.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript ,,Combined application of inorganic and organic phosphorous with inoculation of phosphorus solubilizing bacteria improved productivity, grain quality and net economic returns of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum [L.] R. Br.),, contains interesting results. However, the manuscript needs to be improved before it can be considered further.
My comments are listed below.
Please be sure that your manuscript thoroughly establishes how this work is fundamentally novel. Specific comparisons should be made to previously published materials that have a similar purpose. Please present a strong case for how this work is a major advance. This needs to be done in the manuscript itself, not just in the response to review comments. This is a very important point on the basis of which I will deal with your manuscript below.
Please be sure that your abstract and your Conclusions section not only summarize the key findings of your work but also explain the specific ways in which this work fundamentally advances the field relative to prior literature.
The significance of this study should be more emphasize in the introduction.
The abstract should be factual and should contain background, most important results and conclusions.
Line 61-72, 73-83 micro, macronutrients, fertilizers: This important paper has also dealt with this in detail and therefore authors are advised to add it here to improve the introduction. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722011354
The manuscript contains a large number of abbreviations, consider adding a list of the most important ones to the beginning of the manuscript.
Line 159: Improve the notation of the equation with an explanation.
Line 198: The same too.
Line 269: I would be interested in measurement deviations.
Line 373: Expand the conclusion with the most important findings. Indicate the future perspectives of your research.
Author Response
Reviewer 2 comments
Comment 1. Please be sure that your manuscript thoroughly establishes how this work is fundamentally novel. Specific comparisons should be made to previously published materials that have a similar purpose. Please present a strong case for how this work is a major advance. This needs to be done in the manuscript itself, not just in the response to review comments. This is a very important point on the basis of which I will deal with your manuscript below.
Response: Correction has been made as per suggestion.
Comment 2. Please be sure that your abstract and your Conclusions section not only summarize the key findings of your work but also explain the specific ways in which this work fundamentally advances the field relative to prior literature.
Response: The relevant information has been added.
Comment 3: The significance of this study should be more emphasize in the introduction.
Response: The significance has been emphasized in the introduction of the manuscript.
Comment 4: Line 61-72, 73-83 micro, macronutrients, fertilizers: This important paper has also dealt with this in detail and therefore authors are advised to add it here to improve the introduction. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722011354
Response: The manuscript has been consulted and cited to improve the introduction
Comment 5: The manuscript contains a large number of abbreviations, consider adding a list of the most important ones to the beginning of the manuscript
Response: Correction has been made as per suggestion.
Comment 6: Line 159: Improve the notation of the equation with an explanation.
Response: The notations have been explained
Comment 7: Line 198: The same too.
Response: The notations have been explained
Comment 8: Line 269: I would be interested in measurement deviations.
Response: The deviations are indicated by lettering in the tables
Comment 9: Line 373: Expand the conclusion with the most important findings. Indicate the future perspectives of your research.
Response: Conclusion section has been expanded
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been improved and can be accept.
