Apple–Soybean Mixed Stand Increased Fine Root Distribution and Soil Water Content with Reduced Soil Nitrate Nitrogen
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
General comments:
The article is good; however, it needs to be fine-tuned. Therefore, suggesting the authors to
- Add recent citations in Intro. Also, highlight the legumes effect in the mixed stand.
- Provide appropriate information in the M&M segment.
- Discussion and conclusion parts are to be strengthened.
Title: Please modify the title as:
Apple-Soybean Mixed Stand Increased Fine Root Distribution and Soil Water Content with Reduced Soil Nitrate Nitrogen
It sounds better and more attractive.
Abstract: Please write a sentence at the beginning of the abstract mentioning the benefits of mixed stand in an agroforestry system with legumes. [Line 12]
Introduction: Add one or two sentences highlighting the benefits of legumes in a mixed stand. It is a vital part of the study. [Line 59]
Also, enrich the Intro [Ref: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2018.01.001
Lines: 66-68: Beneficial roles of legumes in the mixed-stand are to be mentioned highlighting soil physical (organic matter addition, increase in soil water holding capacity), chemical (N and other nutrients benefits) and biological quality (enrichment of Rhizobium and other microbial population enrichment) improvement. It will add the value. [Add recent citations of 2022-23].
Lines 79-80: Please make it: apple-based
Line 92: Clarify. Also, look into the comments in the reviewed PDF file.
M&M: it is ok. However, look into the comments and highlighted portions [Lines: 122, 128, 230-231] and justify.
Results: Results part is ok. But, please provide the raw data for Figures 4 and 5.
Do the necessary corrections in Table 3 [highlighted]
Discussion: This is ok. However, some more citations are needed. Following are the suggested citations.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070739
https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-03030298/document
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093022
https://www.soilassociation.org/media/19141/the-agroforestry-handbook.pdf
References: Please arrange/ format as per the journal style.
All the best !!!
Reviewer.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewer:
Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Apple-soybean intercropping increased fine root distribution and soil water content and reduced soil nitrate nitrogen content in the field” (No.: agronomy-2184979). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as flowing:
Responds to the reviewer's comments:
- Title: Please modify the title as: Apple-Soybean Mixed Stand Increased Fine Root Distribution and Soil Water Content with Reduced Soil Nitrate Nitrogen
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, we have completed the revision of the title.
- Abstract: Please write a sentence at the beginning of the abstract mentioning the benefits of mixed stand in an agroforestry system with legumes. [Line 12]
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, which we have added to the beginning of the summary.
- Introduction: Add one or two sentences highlighting the benefits of legumes in a mixed stand. It is a vital part of the study. [Line 59]
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, which we have added to the introduction section. [Line 66]
- Lines: 66-68: Beneficial roles of legumes in the mixed-stand are to be mentioned highlighting soil physical (organic matter addition, increase in soil water holding capacity), chemical (N and other nutrients benefits) and biological quality (enrichment of Rhizobium and other microbial population enrichment) improvement. It will add the value.
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, which we have added to the introduction section. [Line 68–72]
- Lines 79-80: Please make it: apple-based
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, we have completed the changes. [Line 82]
- Line 92: Clarify. Also, look into the comments in the reviewed PDF file.
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, we have completed the changes. [Line 88–89 and 93]
- M&M: it is ok. However, look into the comments and highlighted portions [Lines: 122, 128, 230-231] and justify.
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, we have completed the changes, and the previous crop on this plot was maize. [L120, 133, 239 and 240]
- Results: Results part is ok. But, please provide the raw data for Figures 4 and 5.
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, we sent the raw data as an Excel file.
- Do the necessary corrections in Table 3 [highlighted]
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, the "No." is linked to the text on the next line.
- Discussion: This is ok. However, some more citations are needed. Following are the suggested citations.
Response: Thank you in particular for your comments, we have cited the relevant literature.
Special thanks to you for your good comments. Your suggestions and opinions are very important to us. We have revised the article according to your suggestions and added many missing parts, hoping to better present our research results to readers. I sincerely wish you every success in your work.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.
We appreciate for Editors and Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
With best regards,
Sincerely Yours,
Corresponding author: Wei Zhang
E-mail addresses: [email protected]
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
In order to make your article as high quality as possible, please find my comments bellow:
The main remark refers to the methodology, presentation of research results and discussion. Namely, the methodology sometimes unnecessarily goes into details and sometimes is insufficiently described. Presentation of research results (interpretation of tables and graphs) is not systematic (standardized), and sometimes the sentences are incomplete. Some graphs should be complemented to make them clearer. The discussion is too general and comparison of the obtained results with the results of other authors in the world is missing, Standard international terminology should be used (e.g., in the materials and methods the units for the amount of applied fertilizer are kg hm-2 (hm-2 is hectares – ha); also the yield in table 3 is expressed in kg hm-2.
Chapter comments
Title – corresponds to the research area
Abstract – it is informative enough and contains all the necessary data
Key words – are chosen adequately
Introduction
- the reader is introduced to the work through a review of the literature and the research objectives are presented
-line 92 - instead determine the effects of intercropping on corn h should be written apple (?)
Materials and methods
It is important to specify how many repetitions the experiment was set up in?
– in line 100 degrees mark is missing (o) and minutes (Õš) at presentation latitude and longitude, as well as the markings of the sides of the world (N and E)
- in line 102 states the total precipitation during the survey in the period June-October, and line 104 shows the average annual amounts over the past 5 years. For the sake of comparison, it would be good to state the five-year average precipitation amounts only for the period June-October.
- for the soil in the research, it is more important to specify the texture, and the type of soil (sierozem) is not so important.
- instead of the average values of the displayed soil parameters, it would be better to show the features by horizons (if the soil is not homogeneous)
- line 106 – whether soil water capacity is expressed in volume or weight percentages (%vol. or % mass.?).
- line 107 - instead of whole nitrogen should be written total N.
- line 109 – at the end of the sentence is probably missing “potassium”?
- line 124 – diameter of what? Diameter of tree – incomplete sentence.
- line 128 - instead of kg hm-2 should be written hectares – kg ha-1.
- line 130 - when exactly were the irrigations carried out (5 times a year)? Which irrigations method was used? How is the start and stop of irrigations determined? If more water is added than the soil's water capacity, its drainage occurs.
- line 144 - instead of soil cores should be written soil sample. This is undisturbed soil sample. It is necessary to specify the number of samples. What is the height of the sampling cylinder?
- line 159 – weighing method is gravimetric method, healthy leaves in the middle of what? incomplete sentence
-line 168 - instead of d and l should be written diameter and length
- line 182 - instead Lst should be written Las (probably)
- lines198-206 – there is no need for such a detailed description - if possible, shorten it.
- Soil moisture content was determined by the gravimetric method.
- in formula (equation) 6 instead of YIS should be written YAS (probably).
Results:
- Due to the large number of parameters and their interaction, the presentation of results must be systematic, so that the reader does not get lost in the forest of data. For example for each parameter (FRLD, SWC, SNC) it is necessary to comment first on general regularities, then on vertical and spatial distribution, then on different growth stages, and then on differences between years.
- for greater visibility of figure 3, it is recommended to mark individual growth phases (FS, PS and DS) and research years (2020 and 2021), as well as cultivation systems (MA and SA), within the graph. Different growth stages of soybean are marked in the legend (soybean branching stage, soybean flower and pod stage and seed filling stage) and the methodology indicates that root and soil samples will be taken at flowering stage(FS), podding stage (PS) and drumming stage (DS). Please make the display of data consistent. Explain the abbreviations MA and AS in the description of the figures. The same applies to figures 4, 5, 6 and 7.
- line 272 – 2936% is it mistake?
- line 340 – extremely significant positive correlation with SNC and ST – These correlations are not that strong. According to which criteria did you interpret the obtained values?. Since this is the first time you mention ST, use the full name and not the abbreviation.
- in the legend of table 2 there are FRLD and SD which are missing in the table?
-unify terms steam diameter (line 392) and steam thick used in figure 8 and picture description (line 400).
- Due to better understanding and transparency of figures 8 suggestion is to use same symbols for MS (for example square) respectively IS (for example circle) and different years to be shown with different colors (for example 2020 black, 2021 red).
- in description of picture 8 explain what are MS and IS
- how did you calculate plant number per ha of apples 1100, if the planting distance was 5m x 3m?
- unify terms kernel (line 405) and grain (in table 3). Use only one.
Discussion
- How do you explain higher FRLD of soybeans in 2021 compared to 2020?
- Explain the impact of irrigation on distribution of SWC?
- Explain the impact of irrigation and fertilization on distribution of SNC?
- To what extent can the obtained results be used in relation to irrigation and fertilization recommendations in similar agroecological conditions (agroforestry systems) in China?
Conclusion
- conclusions fully follow the results of the research.
References
- The list contains all the references mentioned in the paper
- it is necessary to standardize the writing of the name of the journal (either capital or small letters)
- to bold the year in the reference number 19
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewer:
Thank you very much for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Apple-soybean intercropping increased fine root distribution and soil water content and reduced soil nitrate nitrogen content in the field” (No.: agronomy-2184979). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer's comments are as flowing:
Responds to the reviewer's comments:
- -line 92 - instead determine the effects of intercropping on corn h should be written apple (?)
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to it. [L93]
- It is important to specify how many repetitions the experiment was set up in?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L111]
- in line 100 degrees mark is missing (o) and minutes (Õš) at presentation latitude and longitude, as well as the markings of the sides of the world (N and E)
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to it. [L100]
- in line 102 states the total precipitation during the survey in the period June-October, and line 104 shows the average annual amounts over the past 5 years. For the sake of comparison, it would be good to state the five-year average precipitation amounts only for the period June-October.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, We believe that the five-year average precipitation will give the reader an idea of the annual precipitation at the trial site and will facilitate an understanding of the growing environment of the fruit trees, not limited to the rainfall during the period of co-occurrence with soybeans.
- for the soil in the research, it is more important to specify the texture, and the type of soil (sierozem) is not so important.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to it. [L104]
- instead of the average values of the displayed soil parameters, it would be better to show the features by horizons (if the soil is not homogeneous)
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to it. [L104–106]
- line 106 – whether soil water capacity is expressed in volume or weight percentages (%vol. or % mass.?).
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we used weight percentages. [L107]
- line 107 - instead of whole nitrogen should be written total N.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to it. [L108]
- line 109 – at the end of the sentence is probably missing “potassium”?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L109]
- line 124 – diameter of what? Diameter of tree – incomplete sentence.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L123–124]
- line 128 - instead of kg hm-2 should be written hectares – kg ha-1.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [L132–142]
- line 130 - when exactly were the irrigations carried out (5 times a year)? Which irrigations method was used? How is the start and stop of irrigations determined? If more water is added than the soil's water capacity, its drainage occurs.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have added detailed information on irrigation to the article. In addition the trial site is in a semi-arid region with hot summer temperatures and high evaporation, which makes drip irrigation slow to feed and less likely to cause drainage obstacles.
- line 144 - instead of soil cores should be written soil sample. This is undisturbed soil sample. It is necessary to specify the number of samples. What is the height of the sampling cylinder?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. And the hollow part of the soil auger is 60cm long and will be marked at 20cm intervals to facilitate our sampling. [L148–149]
- line 159 – weighing method is gravimetric method, healthy leaves in the middle of what? incomplete sentence
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L159–160]
- -line 168 - instead of d and l should be written diameter and length
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [L169]
- line 182 - instead Lst should be written Las (probably)
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [L186]
- lines198-206 – there is no need for such a detailed description - if possible, shorten it.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them.[L223–233]
- in formula (equation) 6 instead of YIS should be written YAS (probably).
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [L237]
- Due to the large number of parameters and their interaction, the presentation of results must be systematic, so that the reader does not get lost in the forest of data. For example for each parameter (FRLD, SWC, SNC) it is necessary to comment first on general regularities, then on vertical and spatial distribution, then on different growth stages, and then on differences between years.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, The distribution of fine roots, soil water content and soil nitrate-nitrogen content varied over time and space, making it difficult to disentangle time and space in the analysis, and we have added differences between years.
- for greater visibility of figure 3, it is recommended to mark individual growth phases (FS, PS and DS) and research years (2020 and 2021), as well as cultivation systems (MA and SA), within the graph. Different growth stages of soybean are marked in the legend (soybean branching stage, soybean flower and pod stage and seed filling stage) and the methodology indicates that root and soil samples will be taken at flowering stage(FS), podding stage (PS) and drumming stage (DS). Please make the display of data consistent. Explain the abbreviations MA and AS in the description of the figures. The same applies to figures 4, 5, 6 and 7.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have redone Figure 3 and completed the appropriate changes to the other images as well.
- line 272 – 2936% is it mistake?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, this is not a mistake; in the case of fruit trees in monoculture, the fine roots in the middle of the rows are almost non-existent, whereas in the intercropping pattern, soybeans have an abundance of fine roots, leading to a large difference between the two. [L268]
- line 340 – extremely significant positive correlation with SNC and ST – These correlations are not that strong. According to which criteria did you interpret the obtained values?. Since this is the first time you mention ST, use the full name and not the abbreviation.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, The original text refers to a highly significant positive correlation between FRLD and SNC and FRLD and ST, but not between SNC and ST.[L345]
- in the legend of table 2 there are FRLD and SD which are missing in the table?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [Table 2]
- -unify terms steam diameter (line 392) and steam thick used in figure 8 and picture description (line 400).
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [L374 and 377]
- Due to better understanding and transparency of figures 8 suggestion is to use same symbols for MS (for example square) respectively IS (for example circle) and different years to be shown with different colors (for example 2020 black, 2021 red).
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [Figure 8]
- in description of picture 8 explain what are MS and IS
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [Figure 8]
- how did you calculate plant number per ha of apples 1100, if the planting distance was 5m x 3m?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, sorry, we made a low-level mistake and have completed the correction of the corresponding data.
- unify terms kernel (line 405) and grain (in table 3). Use only one.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them. [L383–384]
- How do you explain higher FRLD of soybeans in 2021 compared to 2020?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L408–411]
- Explain the impact of irrigation on distribution of SWC?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L432–436]
- Explain the impact of irrigation and fertilization on distribution of SNC?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L458–462]
- To what extent can the obtained results be used in relation to irrigation and fertilization recommendations in similar agroecological conditions (agroforestry systems) in China?
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have completed the additions to this content. [L506–509]
- conclusions fully follow the results of the research.
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes to them.
References
- The list contains all the references mentioned in the paper
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have carefully checked and revised it.
- it is necessary to standardize the writing of the name of the journal (either capital or small letters)
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have carefully checked and revised it.
- to bold the year in the reference number 19
Response: special thanks to you for your comments, we have made changes.
Special thanks to you for your good comments. Your suggestions and opinions are very important to us. We have revised the article according to your suggestions and added many missing parts, hoping to better present our research results to readers. I sincerely wish you every success in your work.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in revised paper.
We appreciate for Editors and Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
With best regards,
Sincerely Yours,
Corresponding author: Wei Zhang
E-mail addresses: [email protected]
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Autors,
now I believe that the manuscript has been sufficiently improved to warrant publication in Agronomy.
Kind regards.
