Recovery of Grain Yield and Protein with Fertilizer Application Post Nitrogen Stress in Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
, Joao Arthur Antonangelo 2, Amanda de Oliveira Silva 1, Vaughn Reed 3 and Brian Arnall 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript reports a comprehensive study on the impacts of N fertilizer application post N-deficiency on winter wheat yield and protein content. A major novel finding is that, in disagreement with conventional thought, application of N after appearance of N-deficiency symptom has similar or even higher effects on recovery of both yield and protein content. This finding is valuable as it suggests the application of N fertilizer has wider window without evoking penalty in yield and quality, and therefore more flexible, and possibly reducing N application. The experiments were conducted for multiple year and locations with appropriate controls. The conclusions are supported by data. I have only one suggestion that concerns the conclusions, which in my opinion should be more concise to avoid deflection of the major finding.
Author Response
Reviewer: # 1
Comments and Suggestions for Authors: This manuscript reports a comprehensive study on the impacts of N fertilizer application post N-deficiency on winter wheat yield and protein content. A major novel finding is that, in disagreement with conventional thought, application of N after appearance of N-deficiency symptom has similar or even higher effects on recovery of both yield and protein content. This finding is valuable as it suggests the application of N fertilizer has wider window without evoking penalty in yield and quality, and therefore more flexible, and possibly reducing N application. The experiments were conducted for multiple year and locations with appropriate controls. The conclusions are supported by data. I have only one suggestion that concerns the conclusions, which in my opinion should be more concise to avoid deflection of the major finding.
Response: The authors appreciate the reviewer’s feedback and thus have improved the ‘Conclusions’ section accordingly.
Reviewer 2 Report
Please check the following :
Line 15: site years should be written without a hyphen
Line 21: yield limiting should be written with a hyphen Line 26: The plant development Line 27: The level Line 42: The growth Line 49: Over-fertilization Line 77: spikeletsLine 82: low-yielding
Line 98: of instead limitation on Paragraph 2.3. typo in the word yield Line 413: typo in the word presence
Author Response
Reviewer: # 2
Comments and Suggestions for Authors:
Line 15: site years should be written without a hyphen
Response: The authors are grateful for the suggestion, but since site-years was used throughout the rest of the paper and the reviewer only suggested correction in the abstract, the authors preferred not to correct the word. Nonetheless, other articles referenced in the study also use the same terminology.
Line 21: yield limiting should be written with a hyphen
Response: The sentence has been corrected accordingly.
Line 26: The plant development
Response: Done accordingly.
Line 27: The level
Response: “The” was added to the sentence.
Line 42: The growth
Response: Done accordingly.
Line 49: Over-fertilization
Response: Done accordingly.
Line 77: spikelets
Response: It has been corrected in the revised version of the MS.
Line 82: low-yielding
Response: The sentence has been corrected accordingly.
Line 98: of instead limitation on
Response: The sentence has been corrected accordingly.
Paragraph 2.3. typo in the word yield
Response: The typo has been fixed.
Line 413: typo in the word presence
Response: It has been corrected accordingly.
Reviewer 3 Report
The work is of high relevance as it illustrates that in-season adjustments of N fertilizer applications are reasonable. This study supports more sustainable N management practices and encourages farmers to ‚move away from pre-plant and fall N applications for winter wheat grain production’.
The experimental design is justified and sound, with classical statistics applied to the data. Data are presented concisely and well focused. I seldomly, as a reviewer, found so little reason to complain..
Comments:
On page 2 you state that wheat has a low uptake efficiency. To my knowledge that is not proven, as uptake kinetic parameters (Cmin, Vmax) of N uptake transporters are comparable to other crops and rooting depth and rooting density (RLD) as well. Low uptake efficienyc, in my opinion, is simply a reflection of the overdosing of N and N surplus after harvest., Please comment on this, or modify the statement.
Page 2: the overall motivation of the study is nicely described.
Small corrections:
Page 1: and development of stems (not steams).
Page 2: stems but not steams
Page 12: a in application missing
Author Response
Reviewer: # 3
Comments and Suggestions for Authors:
The work is of high relevance as it illustrates that in-season adjustments of N fertilizer applications are reasonable. This study supports more sustainable N management practices and encourages farmers to ‘move away from pre-plant and fall N applications for winter wheat grain production’.
The experimental design is justified and sound, with classical statistics applied to the data. Data are presented concisely and well-focused. I seldomly, as a reviewer, found so little reason to complain.
Response: The authors are grateful for the reviewer’s feedback.
Comments:
On page 2 you state that wheat has a low uptake efficiency. To my knowledge that is not proven, as uptake kinetic parameters (Cmin, Vmax) of N uptake transporters are comparable to other crops and rooting depth and rooting density (RLD) as well. Low uptake efficiency, in my opinion, is simply a reflection of the overdosing of N and N surplus after harvest., Please comment on this, or modify the statement.
Response: The authors agree with reviewer and have changed the sentence to: “Soil N application uncoordinated and/or excessive to crop demand can lead to potential environmental pollution”.
Page 2: the overall motivation of the study is nicely described.
Response: The authors are grateful for the reviewer’s suggestions and comments.
Small corrections:
Page 1: and development of stems (not steams).
Response: The misspelling has been corrected.
Page 2: stems but not steams.
Response: The authors have changed it in the manuscript accordingly.
Page 12: a in application missing
Response: The misspelling has been corrected.
