Real-Time Nitrogen Application of Rice Varieties Based on Leaf Colour Chart under System of Rice Intensification in Temperate Climate
, Raihana Habib Kanth 1, Bisma Jan 1, Aijaz Nazir 2, Shafat Ahmad Ahanger 3,*, Mohammad Salim Mir 1, Nasir Bashir Naikoo 4, Suhail Fayaz 5, Khursheed Ahmad Dar 1, Audil Gul 6, Tajamul Mansoor 4, Ibrahim Al-Ashkar 7, Arpna Kumari 8, Muhammad Habib ur Rahman 9 and Ayman El Sabagh 10,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript intended to find the critical value of the Leaf color chart (LCC) for real-time nitrogen (N) application in rice varieties under the system of rice intensification through conducting a field experiment, the rice growth, yield, and economics were recorded to reflect the influence of different fertilization treatments. Generally, the manuscript is interesting and can promote the application of LCC method in regional nitrogen management and food security. However, several questions must be solved before I recommend the manuscript for publication in the journal.
Major comments:
(1) The authors should give a more detailed description of the LCC method, and add a figure of the LCC for different nitrogen application treatments.
(2) Table 8: how did you calculate the B:C Ratio? Net Returns/Cost of cultivation? I cannot get the number in the manuscript.
(3) I really do not understand why the authors added Agronomic efficiency (AE) and apparent nitrogen recovery (RE) to the manuscript. As you mentioned in the manuscript, LCC ≤5 with 20 kg ha-1 recorded highest agronomic and apparent N recovery efficiency, which is different with the results of rice growth, yield, and Economics (LCC ≤ 5 with 30 kg ha-1), can the authors explain the reasons?
(4) Table 3-6, Figure 3-6, for the Treatment of “Factor B: LCC N application”, do the number is the average of SR-3 and SR-4? The authors should provide the records for both SR-3 and SR-4.
(5) Delete Section “2.2 Weather Conditions”.
(6) The manuscript is poorly written with grammar and spelling mistakes in the whole text
(7) Abstract and conclusions: if the SR-3 and SR-4 are both widely cultivated in the study region, the authors should give the readers a recommendation on how to apply the nitrogen and how to use the LCC method for both SR-3 and SR-4 rather than only for SR-4.
Minor Comments:
Line 24-25: change “rice intensification (SRI)” to “SRI”
Line 42: change “worlds” to “world’s”
Line 67: NO3, NH3, or N2O-> NO3, NH3, or N2O, cheke the whole text.
Line 102: Annual precipitation of 812 mm, why only 371.5 and 303 mm rainfall were recorded in 2019 and 2020?
Line 134, 145, 168: delete : and .
Table 2: what is the meaning of “splits”
Line 178: than?
Line 178-179: LCC scores can not influence the plant height and dry matter accumulation
Section 3.6: the authors should provide some descriptions about the objective of conducting this correlation and regression analysis, and move the section behind “Economics of different treatments”.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, we are highly thankful for your broad knowledge and valuable suggestions. All suggestions and changes were incorporated into the revised manuscript
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article entitled "Real-Time Nitrogen Application of Rice Varieties Based on Leaf Colour Chart under System of Rice Intensification in Temperate Climate" is interesting and falls within the scope of the journal. Overall the manuscript is well structures and the findings are worth to the journal's audience, however there are some points that need further clarification:
1. Line24-25: please change “the system of rice intensification (SRI)” to “SRI”
2. Line 28-29: please delete “LCC is used in accordance with crop need, based on physical examination of leaf colour to scheduling N fertilizer application”
3. Line 29: please change “SR-4produced” to “SR-4 produced”
4. Line 31: please change “(7.02 and 6.86 t ha-1) compared to SR-3 (6.49 and6.36 t ha-1) in, 2019 and 2020, respectively” to “(7.02 and 6.86 t ha-1) compared to SR-3 (6.49 and6.36 t ha-1) in 2019 and 2020, respectively”
5. Line 33: please change “respectively which” to “respectively, which”
6. Line 41-93: The relationship between research background and research content is not close. It is necessary to summarize the research progress related to this study, so as to put forward the purpose and significance of this study.
7. Line 42: please change “(Oryza sativa)” to “(Oryza sativa L.)”
8. The statement in Line 66-68 and Line 70-72 should be supplemented by reference.
9. Line 72: please change “An easy, simple and reliable” to “An easy, simple, and reliable”
10. Line 80: please delete “(Leaf colour chart)”
11. Line 97: change “(LCC based N application)” to “(LCC) based N application”
12. Line 102-103: delete “A total of 371.5 and 303 mm rainfall was recorded during Kharif 2019 and 2020, 102 respectively during the growing crop period”
13. Table 1: please change “N, P, and K” to “available N, available P, and available K”.
Please check the unit of available N, available P, and available K. “kg ha-1” is it right?
14. Line 107-115: Please supplement the source of weather conditions
15. Line 134: change “LCC-based Nitrogen application:” to “LCC-based nitrogen application”
16. Line 135: please supplement the details of LCC.
17. Line 138: DAT－what is DAT? Is it DAA (days after anthesis)?
18. Line 139-140: LCC readings were taken by placing the fully expanded middle part of selected leaf from each hill－please supplement the details. If it is a manual reading, how to ensure that errors are avoided? When is the reading taken? AM or PM? What part of the leaves was used for reading?
19. Line 146-166: Please supplement water management method.
20. Line 147: The reasons for choosing those two varieties need to be clear?
21. Line 149: change “(Without Nitrogen application)” to “(without nitrogen application)”
22. Line 167: Table 2－please supplement the treatment of “Recommended dose of nitrogen (RDF)”
23. Line 178-179: delete “The results clearly showed that LCC scores significantly influences the plant height and dry matter accumulation of rice varieties.”
24. Line 191-193: is lengthy – split into two
25. Line 206-210: is lengthy – split into two or three
26. Line 225-228: please reword the sentence
27. Line 256: change “table 7” to “Table 7”
28. Line 282-292: This part can be moved to the research background of the introduction section.
29. Line 293-316: Please increase the analysis of differences among treatments.
30. Line 321: leaf area–where the date? missed?
31. The statement in Line323-325 should be supplemented by reference.
32. The discussion chapter is rather superficial, needs to be more focused.
33. Please check the superscript and subscript of the article, such as Line 31, 67, 123, 154, 230, 231, 232, 234, and 235.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, we are highly thankful for your broad knowledge and valuable suggestions. All suggestions and changes were incorporated into the revised manuscript
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript was improved by the authors during this revision. However, there are still two questions need to be solve before I recommend the manuscript for publication in the journal.
1. The field trial was conducted under ideal conditions with controlled N application, thus LCC method can perfectly indicate the nitrogen requirement. However, in real conditions which crops are cultivated, the crop growth can be affected by multiple factors such as climate, soil, gene, and other fertilizer nutrient elements, the LCC values are a mixed signal, how to apply the LCC method is challenging, can the authors give more discussion on this topic?
2. The manuscript still has substantial grammar and spelling mistakes in the whole text.
Line 35: managements
Line 39: 30 kg N ha-1
Line 45: LCC value of 3 with
Line 62: inefficient (N) management
Line 105: in farmers fields
Line 116-117: was…….. receives ……..
Line 151: 2.4. LCC-based nitrogen application
Line 168: 2.5. Experimental design and treatment details
Line 174: highy
Line 178: m2
Line 180: ha-1
Line 187: panicle-1
Line 200: 2.6. Statistical Analysis
Line 206: 3. Results
Line 237, 239: m2
Line 246: LCC 5 with.
Line 259, 262: ,respectively,
Line 278, 288: table-7,
Line 341: score-based?
Line 369: delete evaluated
Author Response
Dear, we are highly thankful for your valuable suggestions. All corrections/ Changes were incorporated in the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for your great efforts in improving the manuscript. It is improved dramatically.
Author Response
Dear, we are highly thankful for your valuable suggestions. All corrections/ Changes were incorporated in the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
