Design and Experiment on a Distributed Seed Delivery System with a Pneumatic Central-Cylinder Seeder
and Xiwen Luo 4,*
(This article belongs to the Section Agricultural Biosystem and Biological Engineering)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper is showed a study and a field trial conducted in China with the aim to evaluate the performance of a rice seeder.
Generally, an English review must be made by a native speaker
The term velocity must be changed in most cases considering that is related to a scalar value
Methods must be separated from Results, and a Results and Discussion section is suggested
Scientific notation must be reviewed and constant throughout the document
Other suggestion are pointed in the attached file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
I hardly suggest an English review by a native speaker
Author Response
Please see the attachmen
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
· Abstract needs more details from results.
· The goal of the research does not appear the novelty of it. Should explain clearly.
· Should add an information detail for the instruments in Figure 1.
· Section 5.3 Experiment results and analyses need more discussion as a general.
· Conclusions is week, and need improvement.
· Numbers of references are not as important for the topic of the paper. Furthermore, some references are from more than 10 years ago as 2005, 2006. 2010, 2011, and 2012. Should change these references and get new of it within 10 years ago.
· English language should be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attachmen
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The document is much better improved, although must still be revised:
1. Improving the Introduction section mention some information about rice crop performance related to the issue you are studying;
2. Improve Discussion. In practice, you present the results but you don´t discuss them sufficiently according to the bibliography
3. The way you present the results of the ANOVA must be mentioned in scientific notation and not as a sentence...
4.Other suggestions along the document.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
The English is better but can be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Figure 1, needs to inform every part in it to explain clearly.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
