Long-Term Increases in Continuous Cotton Yield and Soil Fertility following the Application of Cotton Straw and Organic Manure

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The text needs a little correction.

Line 73 - The text does not clearly indicate when the research was carried out (Was the research conducted only in 2007 and 2018? What was the research about?) I propose to clarify it. It can be guessed that the soil tests were carried out in 2007 and 2018. Yield studies were carried out for 12 years.

Please indicate what the results refer to in Table 1. Is this the average value for all plots examined in 2007? It is best to present the initial results in the same way as was done in Table 3. The results for each plot are shown and changes over 12 years can be compared.

Author Response

Point 1: Line 73 - The text does not clearly indicate when the research was carried out (Was the research conducted only in 2007 and 2018? What was the research about?) I propose to clarify it. It can be guessed that the soil tests were carried out in 2007 and 2018. Yield studies were carried out for 12 years.

Response 1: Thank you very much for reminding. The field experiments conducted from 2007 to 2018. In the research, the soil tests were carried out in 2007 and 2018, and the yield studies were carried out for 12 years. It was revised in line 73, and was clarified in line 78, 107 and 120, respectively.

Point 2: Please indicate what the results refer to in Table 1. Is this the average value for all plots examined in 2007? It is best to present the initial results in the same way as was done in Table 3. The results for each plot are shown and changes over 12 years can be compared.

Response 2: Thank you for your constructive comment. The results presented in Table 1 referred to the fundamental properties of the topsoil studied in 2007. During soil sampling in 2007, individual treatments were not delineated; instead, soil was collected across the entire plot using an S-type sampling method, mixed uniformly, and subjected to three separate measurements to obtain the mean values. The initial assumption was to treat the entire plot as having a uniform nutrient basis for the purpose of subsequent analysis. Table 1 was revised to conform to the format presented in Table 3 (lines 78-80).

Reviewer 2 Report

My opinion is that this is a well-organised manuscript dealing with long-term effects of soil amendments in a continuous cotton producing field. I accept all the chapters and the used references of the manuscript but I have some small questions/comments:

Lines 89-93: You presented the properties of the applied organic manures. Were the presented values the average of 12 years?

On Fig. 1.b the SD values seems to be too high for significant differences. Are the letters right on the figure?

Please, correct the numbers of Fig. 2 and 3 in the text (lines 166, 174, 188, 214).

Lines 187-199: Could be the high AN and AP content dangerous for the groundwater? Have you checked the NO3- and NH4-N and, PO4-P content of groundwater?

This work could have great practical importance regarding the soil organic matter content. Do you have information whether is it used by farmers? I should be added to the conclusions.

Author Response

Point 1: Lines 89-93: You presented the properties of the applied organic manures. Were the presented values the average of 12 years?

Response 1: Thank you very much for comment. The presented values were the average of 12 years.

Point 2: On Fig. 1.b the SD values seems to be too high for significant differences. Are the letters right on the figure?

Response 2: Thank you very much for suggestion. The high SD value on Fig. 1b was attributed to the fact that this was the yield statistical value of 12 years. Due to the influences of factors such as climate and fertilization, significant inter-year yield disparities were observed, resulting in higher data dispersion. The high SD could potentially lead to increased data variability, thereby diminishing the ability to detect significant differences. Therefore, we re-evaluated the significant differences among the various treatments, ensuring the accuracy of the letters on the figure.

Point 3: Please, correct the numbers of Fig. 2 and 3 in the text (lines 166, 174, 188, 214).

Response 3: Thank you very much for reminding. The numbers of Fig. 2 and 3 in the text were corrected (lines 167, 175, 181, 189, 215).

Point 4: Lines 187-199: Could be the high AN and AP content dangerous for the groundwater? Have you checked the NO3- and NH4-N and, PO4-P content of groundwater?

Response 4: Thank you very much for reminding. We neglected the potential hazards posed by elevated levels of AN and AP to groundwater, and this is a crucial point. We will address and improve this aspect of the study in subsequent work.

Point 5: This work could have great practical importance regarding the soil organic matter content. Do you have information whether is it used by farmers? I should be added to the conclusions.

Response 5: Thank you for your constructive comment. The information used by farmers was added to the conclusions (lines 346-350).