Soil Quality Index as Affected by Integrated Nutrient Management in the Himalayan Foothills
, Aanisa Manzoor Shah 2, Shabir Ahmed Bangroo 2,3, Manbir Pal Sharma 1, Aziz Mujtaba Aezum 2, Nayar Afaq Kirmani 2, Aabid Hussain Lone 4, Mohammad Iqbal Jeelani 5, Ajai Pratap Rai 1, Fehim Jeelani Wani 6, Mohammad Iqbal Bhat 2, Abdul Raouf Malik 7, Asim Biswas 3,* and Latief Ahmad 3,8
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The theme addressed in the manuscript is very interesting, but it is not very original. The experiments carried out are routine soil analyses. A lot of experimental work can be observed, which is very positive.
One recommendation: to display the results, is to use bar graphs so that the differences are clear to the eye.
And I agree with the authors in what is mentioned in the conclusion:
"Consequently, the present investigation offers integrated nutrient module as a promising approach to tackle the constraints of low fertilizer response as well as forthcoming challenges of food security, without compromising the ecosystem health!"
Author Response
Dear Sir
Enclosed find the reply to queries raised by Reviewer 1.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper had evaluated the effect of different INM treatments on the different soil indicators to assess soil quality for perceive the optimal soil management approaches. The research topic is sound and meaningful. I strongly recommend that the authors to deeply revise the manuscript for more clarity and scientific understanding. Some of the specific suggestions and comments are shown below:
1. Line 2-3：The title does not clearly cover the content of the paper.
2. Line 47-61：The section of Introduction lacks logicality. Such as the sentence in Line 50-51 is illogical and does not flow smoothly.
3. Line 116-119: Are the main objectives of this paper to gain the optimal soil management approaches with highest SQI?
4. Is the paper too monotonous with only tables, do you need to use graphs to characterize part of the data results?
5. All the notes below tables are redundancy. It is recommended to simply the treatments in the body text.
6. All the data in tables lack the significance analysis results characterized as a, b, c, etc.
7. All the results lack the conclusions of the optimal treatment for different soil quality indicators. That is, for different soil quality indicators, which treatment is optimal?
8. Line 262-310: Why the indicators of pH and EC are not analyzed?
9. Line 442. Where are the Table 4.16 and Figure 4.14?
10. Line 457-476: What is the INM to obtain the highest SQI? What is the specific method of the optimal INM? it is suggested to further summarize.
Author Response
Dear Sir
Enclosed find the reply to queries raised by Reviewer 2.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
