Evaluation of Genotypic Variability and Analysis of Yield and Its Components in Irrigated Rice to Stabilize Yields in the Senegal River Valley Affected by Climate Change
, Sandrine Mariella Bayendi Loudit 1, Mouritala Sikirou 3,4, Daouda Mboj 2, Tajamul Hussain 5, Roland Bocco 6 and Baboucarr Manneh 2
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
An abstract is made more informative and concise
The methodology of PCA and clustering is not presented in the methodology section (which package, how do you determine no of PCA and cluster? total variability explained in PCA and clustering is not presented in tabular form, please explained on it
Dendrogram is not clear
Citation is not proper
Most of the time you have reported
......by Hussain et al. (Hussain et al., 2022) is not a way or citation
.........reported by Hussain et al. (2022) or ....... (Hussain et al., 2022) make check it thoroughly
All the highlighted and other citations made corrections and uniform
Recheck references also
Please thoroughly revised English language of manuscript
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We appreciate your precious time spent reviewing our paper and providing valuable comments. These aforementioned efforts led to improvements in the current version. We have carefully considered the comments and tried our best to address each of them.
Best regards,
Roland
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Author,
It is my pleasure to review the manuscript entitled “Evaluation of Genotypic Variability and Analysis of Yield and Yield Components in Irrigated Rice to Stabilize Yields under Climate Change Scenario” a research article submitted to MDPI Journal, agronomy. Authors of this manuscript have screened 300 rice varieties to be further used in breeding program for sustainable varietal development. They have identified adaptable and stable materials through exploring the genetic variability within the resources. Overall, the experiments, they performed, are well and the results are convincing. Thus, the presented results takes up an important topic consistent with the profile of the Journal.
-However, even, manuscript is well organized and well described of the conception, I have some suggestions, which might improve the manuscript to make important to the wider readers.
-Few suggestions I have mentioned in the main text pdf file. Please check
-There are many places where grammar can be improved. I suggest a careful revision by an expert.
-Some comments are as below
-Formatting does not match to MDPI style. No line numbers, so difficult to comment. Reference style not as MDPI format
-This article lacks firm aim of the study. Aauthors should elaborate and clarify it precisely and simultaneously. Why diversity analysis is necessary of these materials?
Title: The word “Yield” came redundantly. You may reduce. "under” should be “Under”
-There is no observation on climate, so no need indication in the title
Abstract: - “diverse range of cultivars”-------change with scientifically meaningful words
“Hence” ---redundant
“300 irrigated rice cultivars.” -------what is irrigated rice cultivars????.
“lowland rice cultivars”------Need uniformity of term
1. Introduction
-The Introduction should be more focused on the species Oryza sativa as a large amount of research on genetic diversity are already available in the literature
-Also, it appears that the main aim of the study is to assess the species genetic diversity for conservation and breeding strategies and should be clearly stated and justified by relevant references.
-Introduction should reflect a little results summary, which lacks here. Rationale to be elucidated for the purpose of the study.
2. Materials and Methods
Piezometers---need brand and company name
Table 1 and 2 can be used as supplement
More details on trials should be given such as inclusion of check varieties, how many plants/panicles were samples for each morphological trait. Similarly, details on statistical analysis of phenotypic data is limited.
- Landraces are known to enclose a genetic variability of their own thus special care should be taken to address this quality.
3. Results and Analysis
-Fig. 1: You have replication, so SE should be in the graph
-“ while the mean value was estimated at 112 days (Figure 1A).” ---It is mean value or maximum frequency?? (for A-D of fig. 1 and 2)
--What is indication for 2D?
- Genotypic (GCV) and phenotypic (PCV) coefficient of variations
- Genotypic (GCV) and phenotypic (PCV) coefficient of variations-----Make uniform. Same comment for others also throughout the text
- broad-sense heritability (H2)---H2
-Table 3 comes two times. Correct in the text also
-Fig. 2 and then Fig. 5. ??????
Figs. are difficult to read, need high resolution
Given the obtained results of high genotypic variation of grain yield associated traits the authors should elaborate and comment the use of such germplasm in breeding programs
4. Discussion
---days to heading (DH), days to maturity (DM), total leaf numbers (TL), grain numbers per panicle (GN), fertility percent (FP), grain yield (GY), total dry matter (TDM), and harvest index (HI)-----This type presentation unnecessarily elongate the manuscript
-The authors should discuss more thoroughly the results obtained regarding further use of the rice germplasm in breeding strategies for yield improvement, as most of the agronomic traits assessed were related to that
- discuss whether the objectives of the study were reached and how the data can be further used in breeding
-Supplementary file is not supplied, however, mentioned in the text
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Need extensive correction
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We appreciate your precious time spent reviewing our paper and providing valuable comments. These aforementioned efforts led to improvements in the current version. We have carefully considered the comments and tried our best to address each of them.
Best regards,
Roland
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article entitled "Evaluation of Genotypic Variability and Analysis of Yield and Yield Components in Irrigated Rice to Stabilize Yields under Climate Change Scenario" 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:
Title
1. Climate Change Scenario–What climate change scenario? Drought?
Introduction
1. Hypothesis of the work is not well formulated in the ‘Introduction’ section. The authors did not present a novel justification for carrying out this study. What is the hypothesis of the present study?
2. The novelty of the work must be identified and stated more carefully.
3. Authors need to improve the introduction with appropriate review of literature on the topic.
Materials and Methods
1. Please supplement the source of Table1. The data determined in 1997 cannot be used because the experiment was conducted in 2013-2014.
2. Please supplement the basis of fertilizer application.
3. Please change “Kcl” to “KCl”.
4. Please supplement the meteorological data, such as sunshine duration and precipitation.
5. climate change scenario–How is it reflected in your experimental design?
Discussion
1. First paragraph can be moved to the research background of the introduction section.
2. Need more improvement. It is too superficial and not a meaningful discussion. Author should try to strengthen the discussion part.
3. Put reason why result is obtained.
Conclusions
1. Please rewrite the conclusions.
Language may be improved
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
We appreciate your precious time spent reviewing our paper and providing valuable comments. These aforementioned efforts led to improvements in the current version. We have carefully considered the comments and tried our best to address each of them.
Best regards,
Roland
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have improved the manuscript accordingly. However, I have a suggestion for title.
Evaluation and Analysis almost similar indication. Using both is redundant. If you still want to use both of them then Genotypic Variability might be analysis and Yield might be Evaluation. So you may alter. Title not corrected accordingly. Now become more complex
Minor checking needed
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for your great efforts in improving the manuscript. It is improved dramatically. Now, the paper should be accepted for the publication.
Minor editing of English language required.
