Next Article in Journal
Responsible Mechanisms for the Restriction of Heavy Metal Toxicity in Plants via the Co-Foliar Spraying of Nanoparticles
Previous Article in Journal
Plant Growth Inhibitory Activity of Hibiscus sabdariffa Calyx and the Phytotoxicity of Hydroxycitric Acid Lactone
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effects of Biochar and Organic Additives on CO2 Emissions and the Microbial Community at Two Water Saturations in Saline–Alkaline Soil

Agronomy 2023, 13(7), 1745; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071745
by Pengfei Zhang 1,2, Ziwei Jiang 1,2, Xiaodong Wu 3, Qian Lu 4, Yue Lin 1,2, Yanyu Zhang 1,2, Xin Zhang 1,2, Yi Liu 1,2, Siyu Wang 1,2 and Shuying Zang 1,2,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Agronomy 2023, 13(7), 1745; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071745
Submission received: 26 May 2023 / Revised: 19 June 2023 / Accepted: 26 June 2023 / Published: 28 June 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear author, 

 

This topic is very important especially in the specific conditions of the area (i.e. salinity and alkalinity) in dried regions. However, there are some comments should be considered before publishing such as:

Please determine what is the W-18 straw maturing 134 agent?

Lines 153-155: "in which urea, rice straw, and biochar were added to the culture system at a ratio of 0.18 mg g-1, 3.73 mg g-1, and 7.67 mg g-1 of dry soil, respectively" why you choose those addition rates, please explain.

Please don't start the sentences with abbreviations such as SOC, DNA, and so on

Line 177: please clarify the extracts (water or CaCl2) and extraction ratio of pH, as well clarify the mass method of TDS, and the equipment and its information

In the abstract, you wrote fungal Chao1 and Shannon indices and in line 208 you mentioned bacterial and fungal diversity indices, however there no clarification of those indices

Lines 224 and 225: subscript 4, 3, and 2 in the chemical symbols, as well their similar in line 231, and 467; and superscript the statistical letters in Table 2 and 3

 

The resolution of all Figures should be higher

 

-

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This work gives great insights towards the combined effect of biochar, raw biomass, and microbial activities in decreasing CO2 emissions from saline-alkaline soils. However, some comments from this manuscript need to be addressed. Therefore, this manuscript is recommended for publication after major revision. I advise the authors to consider addressing the following comments to improve this manuscript’s quality.

Lines 41, 70, and 81. Be sure to write a full name before using acronyms (SOC, Rh and ECe).

Line 68. “Large number of studies” is weird to me. I suggest you to change the grammar to for example (numerous studies have demonstrated that …..).

Line 87 - 88. In this sentence what does “reduces soil content” mean? Verify the statement or rewrite it.

Lines 128 - 129. Why were rice straw used as biochar biomass? Any reasons that link this biomass to the study area anthropogenic activities? Additionally, why were 500 °C chosen as the pyrolysis temperature? Furthermore, materials synthesis should be illustrated or explained thoroughly.

Lines 124 - 125. Units used should be consistent to avoid misinterpretation.

Line 136. I have reasons to believe that the names of the bacteria species in this sentence are scientific names. If yes, why not written in italic format?

Line 148 - 149. this sentence contradicts line 140 - 141. Are these different? If yes, please indicate the respective reasons to preincubate soils with different WFPS.

Lines 225, 231, 298, 301 and 467. These lines contain chemical formulas that violate writing rules (it may be caused by the font). Please double check whether it is font problem and do serious revisions. Subscript and superscripts numbers, text or charge should carefully be revised.

Line 260. In figure 1, I can’t see the reason why at 50 days the maximum (peak) CO2 flux at both WFPS (50% and 80%) was reported. Furthermore, the reason for decreasing and increasing trend (for example at day 30, 50, 80, 105 and 120) of CO2 flux is not well addressed. Please explain this figure in detail.

Lines 318. Figure 3 and 4 interests me and captured my eyes because they are beautiful and clear. However, I am failing to see Figure 4 (c) and (d). I am suspiciously thinking that you meant to write a and b as shown in the figures. Please make sure and pay more attention to details.

Lines 381 and 517. Space between “2 and and” is necessary. By the way if s means supporting information, I highly recommend you use capital S. Likewise, revise the space between regions. and 80%

Line443. “The addition of exogenous organic matter would…thereby reducing microbial diversity”. This explanation might be confusing and ambiguous; please make it more specific (relationship or mechanism).

Line 457 - 459. “This may because of the differences in the soil types and fertilization systems and the competition between bacteria and fungi under co-trophic conditions”. Rewrite this sentence using fluent and accurate grammatical format.

None

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have appropriately revised the manuscript. Therefore, acceptance is recommended for the present version of this manuscript.

I recommend the editor ask the authors to check and edit the grammar again. 

Back to TopTop