Performance of Forage Cactus Intercropped with Arboreal Legumes and Fertilized with Different Manure Sources

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript (agronomy-1832638) “Performance of forage cactus intercropped with arboreal legumes and fertilized with different manure sources” is focused in evaluating the forage cactus intercropped with leguminous trees and fertilized with different sources of manure.

The search for alternative sources of fertilizers and symbiosis between plants in production systems, are essential for achieving more sustainable agriculture. The work is well presented and the results are well discussed.

Below are some points to improve.

- Insert an approach to intercropping in the introduction.

- I suggest inserting a diagram in figure form to present the treatments in the material and methods, as the text is confusing.

- Results, discussion and conclusions are adequate.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

The manuscript (agronomy-1832638) “Performance of forage cactus intercropped with arboreal legumes and fertilized with different manure sources” is focused in evaluating the forage cactus intercropped with leguminous trees and fertilized with different sources of manure. The search for alternative sources of fertilizers and symbiosis between plants in production systems are essential for achieving more sustainable agriculture. The work is well presented, and the results are well discussed.

Below are some points to improve.

- Insert an approach to intercropping in the introduction.

Line 47-52. We inserted the following information to attend this request:

However, cactus is not a sole source of feed because it has low concentration of crude pro-tein and fiber [6]. Thus, integrating forage legumes such as Gliricidia sepium and Leucaena leucocephala in forage cactus systems complements the diets of the animals, increases N availability through biological nitrogen fixation, and deposits litter with a low C/N ratio, improving nutrient cycling and increasing carbon and nitrogen sequestration in the soil [7, 8].

- I suggest inserting a diagram in figure form to present the treatments in the material and methods, as the text is confusing.

We inserted a new diagram (Figure 2) with more details about the experiments.

- Results, discussion, and conclusions are adequate.

Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

REVIEW REPORT

Title: Performance of forage cactus intercropped with arboreal legumes and fertilized with different manure sources.

Abstract: Ok. Authors are required to include some numerical / statistical inputs in this section.

Keywords: Acceptable.

Introduction: Well written. However, due emphasis should be given on intercropping system.

Materials and Methods:

##Why so old data has been considered for publication, now?

Experimental Design and Treatment Description

Inputs regarding irrigation channel is required. If applicable.

Total treatment combinations need to be disclosed.

Line 104-105: Fertilizer application was distributed among the rows of forage cactus, excluding the double rows of legumes. Weeds were controlled by hand weeding to avoid competition for nutrients.

Details required.

Stat: ok

Results

Ok

Discussion:

NPK dynamics need to be elaborated and emphasis on correlation with manure, forage and legumes need to give extra attention.

Specific reason behind the efficacy of cattle, goat manure, Broiler litter and sheep is a must (why they are so effective).

Conclusion section should have a future scope section.

In my opinion the MS have some practical implication. However, MS also have some issues need to be addressed. I am suggesting A MAJOR REVISION.

Author Response

Reviewer 2

Title: Performance of forage cactus intercropped with arboreal legumes and fertilized with different manure sources.

Abstract: Ok. Authors are required to include some numerical / statistical inputs in this section.

Thank you for the suggestion. We inserted more data in the abstract as requested.

Keywords: Acceptable.

OK.

Introduction: Well written. However, due emphasis should be given on intercropping system.

We inserted the following:

Line 47-52

However, cactus is not a sole source of feed because it has low concentration of crude pro-tein and fiber [6]. Thus, integrating forage legumes such as Gliricidia sepium and Leucaena leucocephala in forage cactus systems complements the diets of the animals, increases N availability through biological nitrogen fixation, and deposits litter with a low C/N ratio, improving nutrient cycling and increasing carbon and nitrogen sequestration in the soil [7, 8].

Materials and Methods:

##Why so old data has been considered for publication, now?

Good point. The former graduate student responsible for this research did not publish it in time, but we think the data has value and we are pursuing publication now.

Experimental Design and Treatment Description

We improved the description and added a new diagram (Figure 2)

Inputs regarding irrigation channel is required. If applicable.

No irrigation was applied. This was a dryland trial.

Total treatment combinations need to be disclosed.

We inserted the following information:

Line 90-92

Treatments consisted of different cropping systems (IPA-Sertânia Cactus + Leucaena, IPA-Sertânia Cactus + Gliricidia, and IPA-Sertânia Cactus in monoculture) and different sources of manure (cattle, goat, sheep, and broiler litter), totaling 12 treatments.

Line 104-105: Fertilizer application was distributed among the rows of forage cactus, excluding the double rows of legumes. Weeds were controlled by hand weeding to avoid competition for nutrients.

Details required.

We inserted the following information:

Line 101-106

The experimental area was fertilized annually (February 2012 and 2013) with different manures aiming to supply 200 kg N/ha. The amount applied was corrected based on the dry matter contents of the different manures (Table 2). Fertilizer application was distrib-uted among the rows of forage cactus, excluding the double rows of legumes. Weeds were controlled, when necessary, by hand-weeding to avoid competition for nutrients.

Stat: ok

Results Ok

Discussion:

NPK dynamics need to be elaborated and emphasis on correlation with manure, forage and legumes need to give extra attention.

Specific reason behind the efficacy of cattle, goat manure, Broiler litter and sheep is a must (why they are so effective).

We added more discussion on this topic.

Conclusion section should have a future scope section.

We added more information on this.

In my opinion the MS have some practical implication. However, MS also have some issues need to be addressed. I am suggesting A MAJOR REVISION.

Thank you. We addressed all the topics raised during the review.

Reviewer 3 Report

SUGGESTIONS AND CORRECTIONS MARKED IN THE ATACHED MANUSCRIPT

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reviewer 3

Reviewer 3 added his comments on a PDF file. We addressed all his questions, and it is incorporated in the revised file.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Editor will inform you.