Assessment of a Chain Mower Performance for Weed Control under Tree Rows in an Alley Cropping Farming System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors show Figure 2 for the difference between the two cutting tools, and no more. The readers recognize the superior of the chain mower only by bar charts, where they are persuasive enough. Through this work, it is believed that much more schematics, no matter for mechanical structures or experimental methods are strongly recommended for better explanation.

Consider avoiding abbreviations (i.e. Hws+Hrs) in the conclusion section.

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank the reviewer for the comments. In agreement with the other reviewers, we have relevantly modified section 2. Materials and Methods in the parts relating to the technical characteristics of the cutting tools and the description of the experimental method by adding pictures,  tables, and diagrams for a better explanation. The abbreviations in the section 5. Conclusions have been removed. All the corrections were made using the Track Changes function. The modified parts related to the reviewer comments have been underlined in green. We sincerely hope that with the corrections made the article will be clearer.

Reviewer 2 Report

1. There are many irrelevant contents in the introduction, which should focus on the mower and its assessment method.

2. The experiment layout section（2.2） needs a diagram for description.

3. Try to cite the latest references, 5 years is perfect.

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank the reviewer for the comments. We have shortened section 1. Introduction by removing the less relevant parts, focusing it on the research theme. In accordance also with the other reviewers, we have provided diagrams in section 2.2 Experiment layout for better explanations. We have also reduced the references, leaving the most important ones for the topic. All the corrections were made using the Track Changes function. For better visualization, the modified parts related to the reviewer comments have been underlined in yellow. In the hope of making the research and article clearer, we once again thank the reviewer for the comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

The reviewer's comments are uploaded in a pdf file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for the comments. We have accepted and made the various changes requested in order to improve the article and clarify the research carried out. We have shortened the introductory part of the abstract, changed the keywords, added the required parts in the section 1. Introduction, cited the suggested article, changed the name of section 2.1, added Table 1. Cutting tools' technical characteristics, changed the header of Table 2., added pictures of the mowing treatments in alley cropping system (Figure 4.), improved the format of the equations, added the F-values and shortened the tables’ title, improved definition of figures showing the bar-plots, improved Figure 8 , and removed the introductory part at the beginning of section 4. Discussion. We used the Shapiro-Wilk and Bartlett tests in order to verify the Anova assumptions. With the improvements made, we sincerely hope to have made the research and the article clearer. All the corrections were made using the Track Changes function. Changes for better visualization have been underlined in blue.

Reviewer 4 Report

In the present study, Title: Assessment of a chain mower performance for weed control under tree rows in an alley cropping farming system, Authors: Lorenzo Gagliardi, Marco Fontanelli, Christian Frasconi, Mino Sportelli, Daniele Antichi, Lorenzo Gabriele Tramacere, Giovanni Rallo, Andrea Peruzzi, Michele Raffaelli, the use of the chain mower with automatic vine skipping mech- anism for under-row weed control in alley cropping system obtained encouraging results. Indeed, the performance of the mower with chains is comparable to that of the blade mower, whose effectiveness is well established. These findings highlight that the chain mower could be employed as a reliable mean for under row weed control in alley crop- ping systems, proving to be a valid alternative to the methods conventionally applied in these contexts. Concerning the settings tested, the Hws+Hrs setting turns out to be the best compromise between effectiveness and efficiency, having obtained a satisfactory  weed control (weed biomass reduction of 59.61%, and weed cover reduction of 40.94%),  and a higher field capacity compared to the setting with low working speed, with an in- crease of 47.86%.

The results are applicable.

 

The paper should be published

 

Author Response

We warmly thank the reviewer for appreciating the research and considering the results applicable. In accordance with the other reviewers, we have reduced the references, leaving the most important ones for the topic.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Are 2 significant digits in percentage really required?

Patterns can be added to bar charts for better readability.

The reference format should be followed the journal rules.

Units in tables should be consistent. Some are embedded into the title column, but some are independent.

Equation quality can be improved.

Mechanism schematics, instead of photos are be included for more clearly comprehension.

Author Response

We would like to sincerely thank the reviewer for the comments left. We have accepted and made the various changes requested in hopes of further improving the article. We have corrected the significant digits of the percentages, added patterns to the bar charts for easier reading, we have adjusted the references format according to the rules of the Journal, maintained consistency regarding the units in the tables and improved the quality of the equations. Unfortunately, we are very sorry but it is not possible for us to provide mechanism schematics as this is a commercial machine.

Reviewer 2 Report

Accept in present form.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for appreciating the improvements made to the article. We have also taken steps to improve the English language, always in the hope of increasing the quality of the article.