Best Linear Unbiased Predictions of Environmental Effects on Grain Yield in Maize Variety Trials of Different Maturity Groups
, Vlatko Galić 4, Goran Jukić 1, Ivan Varnica 1 and Domagoj Šimić 3,4,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The work concerns the use of linear mixed models to assess changes in the yield of maize in three maturity groups in 5 likizations in Croatia. Environmental effects, genotype, year and interactions were included in the model. Fixed and random effects in the model were assessed.
The work corresponds to the subject of the journal.
The manuscript is written in good English.
The layout of the work is adapted to the requirements of the journal.
Some comments:
Almost all figures require sharpening and legibility. In particular, Figure 1.
I can't see the signatures on the y axis, there are combinations of years and locations, but I can't see anything.
Figure 3, 4, 5 - Are the three FAO 300, FAO 400, and FAO 500 significantly different?
Crop responses vary for different locations. Therefore, soil and weather analysis as well as a more detailed description of the location are required in order to better understand where the differences arise. There isn't much about management. It would be worth supplementing the description of the experiment with these data.
I also wish, the Authors to emphasize the added value of the work.
Author Response
Thank you for your review. These are our responses to your comments. The lines mentioned in responses refer to the revised version of the manuscript.
Almost all figures require sharpening and legibility. In particular, Figure 1. I can't see the signatures on the y axis, there are combinations of years and locations, but I can't see anything.
RESPONSE: The figures are graphically improved.
Figure 3, 4, 5 - Are the three FAO 300, FAO 400, and FAO 500 significantly different?
RESPONSE: The significance of differences among the three maturity groups was commented Lines 208-209, additionally Lines 209-210; Lines 221-223; Line 231
Crop responses vary for different locations. Therefore, soil and weather analysis as well as a more detailed description of the location are required in order to better understand where the differences arise. There isn't much about management. It would be worth supplementing the description of the experiment with these data.
RESPONSE: Some information on soil properties was given Lines 85-88. Markedly, grain yield in two geographically close locations on the same soil type (chernozem) and under similar weather conditions was significantly different (Figures 3, 4). It was also commented Lines 283-287. Information on other weather covariates is added, Lines 131-133.
I also wish, the Authors to emphasize the added value of the work
RESPONSE: The added value of the work is now explicitly given, Lines 280-282.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper conducted analyze of several environmental effects including stress degree days on grain yields in Croatian VCU trials in three maturity groups using linear mixed model for the estimation of fixed and random.
I think it is suitable to be published in the Agronomy journal.
The manuscript is interesting and good written. The planned research experiment, selected equipment, as well as research and statistical methodology do not raise any objections. The authors analyzed in detail and substantively the results obtained and conducted discussions.
A small comment:
Line 299: Zhu et al. (2019) [19] – delete year
Literature items 59 and 60 are missing from the text of the paper.
Author Response
Thank you for your review. These are our responses to your comments.
Line 299: Zhu et al. (2019) [19] – delete year
RESPONSE: The year is deleted.
Literature items 59 and 60 are missing from the text of the paper.
RESPONSE: The literature items were previously missing in the text by a technical mistake. It is corrected.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors took into account most of my comments.
However, almost all figures still require sharpening and legibility.
Author Response
The authors took into account most of my comments.
However, almost all figures still require sharpening and legibility.
RESPONSE: We tried our best to sharp Figures 1, 3, 4, 5. We used "jpeg sharpener tool". In the new revised version, all old versions of figures were deleted to avoid confusion. Please, see also word version of the manuscript where the figures look pretty sharp. We will upload the jpeg files also separately to the system. We hope that the figures are legible now.
