Bioorganic Fertilizer Can Improve Potato Yield by Replacing Fertilizer with Isonitrogenous Content to Improve Microbial Community Composition

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research topic is interesting. There are 3 big flaws. And these need to be corrected. In this version, the paper is not suitable for acceptance into such a serious journal. The experiment lasted only one growing season. This is too short. There is a lack of description with which methods the soil and plant analysis was done. The sentences are very long. This makes the text incomprehensible. 24 comments are marked in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments:

The research topic is interesting. There are 3 big flaws. And these need to be corrected. In this version, the paper is not suitable for acceptance into such a serious journal. The experiment lasted only one growing season. This is too short. There is a lack of description with which methods the soil and plant analysis was done. The sentences are very long. This makes the text incomprehensible. 24 comments are marked in the text.

Response: Thank you for your insightful feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns and improve the quality of our work. Here are our responses to the issues you've raised: In response to concerns about our experiment covering only one growing season, we plan to extend our study across multiple seasons to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the long-term impacts of bioorganic fertilizers on soil fertility and crop yield (Line: 111-113). This expanded dataset will be included in the revised manuscript. Additionally, acknowledging the importance of a detailed methodology, we have enhanced our manuscript with a thorough description of our analytical approaches (Line: 143-163). Furthermore, recognizing the need for clarity, we will simplify sentence structures and use clearer language to ensure each sentence conveys a distinct, clear concept. We will systematically address the 24 comments, ensuring comprehensive responses and necessary manuscript revisions.

We are dedicated to improving the quality of our research and are confident that these revisions will elevate our paper to meet the esteemed standards of your journal. We eagerly anticipate resubmitting a version that addresses all reviewer concerns.

 

Comments 1: According to the magazine's editorial policy. The abstract should not exceed 200 words. Instructions to authors should be read.

Response 1: We have narrowed the summary to 194 words (Line: 14-30).

 

Comments 2: without space [6,7] Correct everywhere.

Response 2: We have changed "[6,7]" to "[6, 7]" and have amended it in the text (Line: 50).

 

Comments3: Whose previous research was this? Which authors?

Response 3: We have made revisions in the manuscript. Tao Wang and Jin Zhou, published in 2022 (Line: 50).

 

Comments  4: Comments 4: [8]c?

Response 4:  It has been deleted (Line: 50).

 

Comments 5: This sentence is too long. It should be split into 2.

Response 5:  We understand your concern about sentence length affecting readability. We modified the sentence as suggested, and for clarity we divided it into three parts (Line: 54-57).

 

Comments 6: Soybeans are a different plant. Please find another example.

Response 6: We have made changes accordingly (Line: 35-75).

 

Comments 7: Whose previous research was this? Which authors?

Response 7: We have made changes accordingly. By Mackiewicz-WalecE and Martina Lori, published in 2023 (Line: 94).

 

Comments 8: The research was conducted for only a few months. So short.

Response 8: The positioning time of this study is four years, and "From April to October in 2023" has been changed to "From 2020 to 2023" (Line: 132).

 

Comments 9: Give longitude and latitude.

Response 9: It has been added (Line: 112).

 

Comments 10: Please write the units correctly. Correct everywhere.

Response 10: Agreed and changed all through the text (Line: 117-119 and 149-152, etc).

 

Comments 11: Such area units are not used. Specify hectares.

Response 11: We have made changes accordingly (Line: 153).

 

Comments 12: State under the table what the abbreviations mean.

Response 12: It has been supplemented accordingly (Line: 154-157).

 

Comments 13: Results are given per kilogram not per 100g.

Response 13: Agreed and changed all through the text (Line: 151-152).

 

Comments 14: 2.2.216. S rRNA What is it?

Response 14: Sorry for the confusion. We have added "16S rRNA"(Line: 158).

 

Comments 15: What methods were used to determine this is missing.

Response 15: It has been changed (Line: 158).

 

Comments 16: The figure from the supplement must be included in the text.

Response 16: It has been changed (Line: 211).

 

Comments 17: No methods how this was determined.

Response 17: It has been supplemented accordingly in 2.3. Determination of agronomic traits, yield and quality (Line: 143).

 

Comments 18: The discussion is acceptable.

Response 18: Great to hear that the discussion is acceptable.

 

Comments 19: This sentence applies to tomatoes. This is unnecessary.

Response 19: It has been deleted.

 

Comments 20: Incorrectly written units again.

Response 20: It has been changed all through the text.

 

Comments 21: What authors of previous studies?

Response 21: It has been changed (Line: 488).

 

Comments 22: It is not writing previous studies. This applies to other authors, not the authors of the article. It should be written without the word earlier.

Response 22: Agreed and changed (Line: 498).

 

Comments 23: Conclusions written correctly. The only thing missing is guidance on how much to apply these fertilisers.

Response 23: It has been changed (Line: 580-582).

 

Comments 24: References should be edited according to the editor's requirements. Authors should read the instructions on the journal's website.

Response 24: Agreed and changed (Line: 622-716).

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This research examined the “Response of soil microbial communities, quality and yield of potato to bioorganic fertilizer substitution in Northwest China”. This current study is interesting. The manuscript has shown progress in the current scientific research and is qualified enough for publishing in “agronomy”. However, some comments need to be addressed with minor revisions before being considered for publication.

1.       The title of the manuscript could be improved to communicate the key findings of the study.

2.       The abstract needs to be qualitative as well as quantitative, to improve the quality of the abstract with quantitative data.

3.       The author should use the abbreviation “LEFSe analysis” in the abstract. (Line: 27)

4.       The authors need to emphasize the novelty in the introduction part.

5.       “The content of Water, protein, starch, calcium, iron, fiber, potassium, magnesium, reducing sugar, reducing sugar, vitamin C, and zinc…..” (Line: 240-241) How? Please incorporate it into the materials and methods section.

6.       The presented figures are unclear and very difficult to understand or interpret. Need to add high-resolution images for better understanding (Figure 1 to 6).

7.       Is the bioorganic fertilizer commercially available, or is it solely made for experimental purposes? And what are other properties of the bioorganic fertilizer apart from organic matter and nitrogen? What about phosphorus and potassium?

8.       Why do authors consider the tuber swelling stage of potatoes for the collection of the sample?

9.       Authors are suggested to add more relevant references or discussion in the results and discussion part to support the findings.

10.   The microbial community analysis requires the original data to be publicly available, So, the accession number of the 16S rRNA and ITS gene sequences must be provided.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

Author Response

Comments:

This research examined the “Response of soil microbial communities, quality and yield of potato to bioorganic fertilizer substitution in Northwest China”. This current study is interesting. The manuscript has shown progress in the current scientific research and is qualified enough for publishing in “agronomy”. However, some comments need to be addressed with minor revisions before being considered for publication.

Reply: Thank you for your positive evaluation of our manuscript. We are grateful for your consideration for publication and your encouragement to continue our research.

 

Comments 1: The title of the manuscript could be improved to communicate the key findings of the study.

Reply1: Agreed and changed (Line: 2-4).

 

Comments 2: The abstract needs to be qualitative as well as quantitative, to improve the quality of the abstract with quantitative data.

Reply 2: Agreed and changed (Line: 18-19).

 

Comments 3: The author should use the abbreviation “LEFSe analysis” in the abstract.

Reply 3: It has been changed.

 

Comments 4: The authors need to emphasize the novelty in the introduction part.

Reply 4: It has been added (Line: 96-98).

 

Comments 5: “The content of Water, protein, starch, calcium, iron, fiber, potassium, magnesium, reducing sugar, reducing sugar, vitamin C, and zinc” (Line: 240-241) How? Please incorporate it into the materials and methods section.

Reply 5: It has been added in 2.3 (Line: 149-152).

 

Comments 6: The presented figures are unclear and very difficult to understand or interpret. Need to add high-resolution images for better understanding (Figure 1 to 6).

Reply 6: We have made adjustments to all the images, such as enlarges the font, increases the resolution, etc (Line: 238-239, 301-302, 369-370, 402-403, 412-413, 424-425 and 470-471).

 

Comments 7: Is the bioorganic fertilizer commercially available, or is it solely made for experimental purposes? And what are other properties of the bioorganic fertilizer apart from organic matter and nitrogen? What about phosphorus and potassium?

Reply 7: The bio-organic fertilizer is available on the market. In addition to organic matter and nitrogen, bio-organic fertilizers are also rich in beneficial microorganisms. These components can improve soil physical and chemical properties, enhance soil fertility and enrich soil microbial community. Biological organic fertilizer can also enhance soil fertility, improve soil microbial environment, improve the utilization rate of fertilizer, non-toxic and harmless, no environmental pollution and other advantages. Chemical fertilizers contain phosphorus and potassium.

 

Comments 8: Why do authors consider the tuber swelling stage of potatoes for the collection of the sample?

Reply 8: Tuber expansion stage is a critical period for potato growth and development, which is directly related to its yield and quality. At this stage, root microorganisms and root exudates are in a more vigorous period. Therefore, this study considered the potato tuber bulking stage as the collection of samples.

 

Comments 9: Authors are suggested to add more relevant references or discussion in the results and discussion part to support the findings.

Reply 9: In response to the reviewers' suggestion, we will add more relevant references and enhance the discussion in both the results and discussion sections to provide a stronger support for our findings. This will ensure that our conclusions are well-anchored in the existing body of scientific literature and facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the study's implications (Line: 485-489, 498-499, 511-513, 525-526 and 537-547).

 

Comments 10: The microbial community analysis requires the original data to be publicly available, So, the accession number of the 16S rRNA and ITS gene sequences must be provided.

Reply 10: Agreed and added in “Data availability statement” (Line: 602-604).

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

Reply: Thank you for your careful review, and we have polished the article.

 

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper “Response of soil microbial communities, quality and yield of potato to bioorganic fertilizer substitution in Northwest China” studied the roles of bioorganic fertilizer substitution with equal nitrogen inputs in potato quality, yield and soil microecological environment. The work is relevant for agriculture. But the experimental design and some of the results raise doubts about their uniqueness and novelty.

1.     Materials and methods: How were the data normalized? Were rarefaction curves constructed, was there enough data for analysis? Since this directly affects the alpha diversity assessment and statistical comparisons.

2.     Please place the pictures after the text where they are first mentioned, if possible.

Author Response

Comments:

The paper “Response of soil microbial communities, quality and yield of potato to bioorganic fertilizer substitution in Northwest China” studied the roles of bioorganic fertilizer substitution with equal nitrogen inputs in potato quality, yield and soil microecological environment. The work is relevant for agriculture. But the experimental design and some of the results raise doubts about their uniqueness and novelty.

Reply: Thank you for your evaluation of our research paper. We understand your concerns regarding the uniqueness and novelty of the experimental design and results, and we provide the following responses:

1. Regional specificity of the experimental design:

Our research focuses on the rainfed farming region in northwest China, where the average annual rainfall is 420mm and drought occurs frequently. In years of severe drought, crops have been greatly reduced or even lost.

2. Agricultural application of bio-organic fertilizers as a nitrogen source substitute:

This study explores the application of bio-organic fertilizers in potato production, which aligns with national policies and agricultural development trends. According to search results, the state strongly supports the use of bio-organic fertilizers to optimize the structure of agricultural inputs, improve soil, enhance fertility, and improve crop rhizosphere microbial communities.  This further emphasizes the relevance and timeliness of our research, indicating that the use of bio-organic fertilizers in agriculture is an emerging and important field.

3. Uniqueness and novelty of the results:

Our study reveals the impact of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on potato quality, yield, and soil microbial communities, which are novel findings in the northwest region (Line: 96-98). Based on search results, the impact of organic fertilizer on soil microbial community characteristics is an area of research progress.  Our study provides specific insights into how bio-organic fertilizers affect potato production through data analysis over a four-year long-term positioning period, which is relatively novel in research in the northwest region (Line: 111-120).

4. Relationship between soil microbial communities and crop quality and yield:

The results of this study highlight the connection between soil microbial communities and the quality and yield of potatoes.  The study found that the structure and function of soil microbial communities are crucial for the health and productivity of potatoes.  By analyzing changes in soil microbial communities, this study offers a new perspective on how bio-organic fertilizers can improve potato quality and yield by affecting soil microbes (Line: 454-477).

 

Comments 1: Materials and methods: How were the data normalized? Were rarefaction curves constructed, was there enough data for analysis? Since this directly affects the alpha diversity assessment and statistical comparisons.

Reply1: In our study, in order to eliminate the influence of different dimensions and scales on the analysis results, we adopted the method of data normalization. Specifically, we used Min-Max Normalization, which maps the original data into the [0,1] interval by a linear transformation, ensuring that the data is comparable across scales. In addition, we also consider Z-Score standardization, which standardizes the data based on the mean and standard deviation of the original data, and unifies the data of different magnitudes into the same magnitude, ensuring the comparability between the data. These normalization methods help to improve the accuracy and stability of subsequent statistical analyses.

To assess the alpha diversity of the sample and determine whether there is enough data for the analysis, we constructed sparsity curves. By removing monomers, otus with only one sequence, from the dataset, we constructed dilution curves for each individual sample showing the change in the number of observed otus relative to the total number of identified bacterial rRNA sequences. These curves helped us assess the OTU richness of our samples and determine whether sufficient sequencing depth was achieved for reliable alpha diversity assessments.

We ensured that the sequencing depth of each sample was sufficient for statistical comparison. Good's coverage estimates and analysis of sparsity curves were used to assess the OTU richness of each sample and to ensure that the dilution curves of most samples were close to saturation, indicating that our sample size was adequate. In addition, the size of our data also meets the preconditions for conducting statistical tests such as ANOVA (or Kruskal-Wallis test), which require a sufficient sample size to ensure the reliability of the results.

 

Comments 2: Please place the pictures after the text where they are first mentioned, if possible.

Reply 2: We have placed all images after the text in which they are first mentioned (Line: 302, 369-370, 402-403, 412-413, 424-425 and 470-471). This helps the reader to understand the relevant content more intuitively as they read, and to synchronize with the text description. Although we try to adjust the images as you suggest, in some cases, due to other constraints such as page layout, we have to arrange them slightly further back based on their serial number. At the same time, it is also the typesetting version of the feedback after review by the editorial department of this journal. We have ensured that this adjustment does not affect readers' understanding of the content of the article, and that the connection between the images and the text they correspond to remains clear. In summary, we have optimized the layout of the page to ensure that the layout of the images and text is both beautiful and functional. We believe that this layout can provide a better reading experience for readers.

 

To sum up, our study has fully considered and processed data normalization, sparsity curve construction and data volume to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the research results. We appreciate your valuable comments and hope that these replies will answer your questions.

 

Thank you again for your suggestions and support.

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article should be considered for minor revision revision, particularly with regard to the following:

Line 54 – after the reference “[8]” there is the letter “c”, is it realy needed, or is it a mistake? Please verify.

 

Introduction In this section you should use short paragraphs rather than long ones – say about 2–4 per A-4 typed page, not forgetting that a paragraph must have at least two sentences and a common statement or subject. Very long sentences distract the reader, resulting in difficulty reading and loss of interest.

Discussion This chapter should begin with a briefly reminder of the central research question or hypothesis. Summarizing the main objective of your study to contextualize your findings.

For example:  “The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different fertilization strategies on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial diversity in Gansu Province's arid sandy soils.”

The text from line 466 till 473 does not belong here (you are not discussing your findings, just stating others results), you should not discuss prior work without reference to your work. And from line474 till 476 is a conclusion, not a discussion.

You have to discuss whether your information is similar or different from other published evidence and why this might be so. What was different in methods or analysis, what was similar?

 

One example of how should be the Discussion

The present study aimed to assess the impact of combined bioorganic and chemical fertilizers on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial diversity in Gansu Province's sandy soils. Our results indicate that the application of bioorganic fertilizers, in conjunction with chemical fertilizers, significantly improved potato yield by 25% and enhanced microbial diversity compared to control treatments. These findings are consistent with previous research showing the beneficial effects of bioorganic fertilizers on soil health and crop productivity (Zhang et al., 2020). However, our results diverge from the study by Liu et al. (2019), which reported no significant yield increase with combined fertilizer treatments. This discrepancy may be due to the different fertilizer application ratios used in the two studies.

The improvement in potato yield and microbial diversity could be attributed to enhanced nutrient cycling and soil structure, which has been observed in other crop systems (Shi et al., 2018). However, one limitation of our study is its focus on a single growing season and a specific region, which may limit the broader applicability of the results. Future research should explore the effects of this fertilization strategy across different regions and over multiple growing seasons to assess the long-term benefits on soil health and microbial communities.

Overall, our findings suggest that the combined use of bioorganic and chemical fertilizers may be a promising strategy for improving crop yield and promoting sustainable farming practices in arid regions. These results have important implications for enhancing food security while reducing the environmental impact of conventional fertilization practices.

Author Response

The article should be considered for minor revision revision, particularly with regard to the following:

Comments 1: Line 54 – after the reference “[8]” there is the letter “c”, is it realy needed, or is it a mistake? Please verify.

Reply 1: Sorry for the confusion. We have deleted "C” (Line: 50).

 

Comments 2: Introduction In this section you should use short paragraphs rather than long ones – say about 2–4 per A-4 typed page, not forgetting that a paragraph must have at least two sentences and a common statement or subject. Very long sentences distract the reader, resulting in difficulty reading and loss of interest.

Reply 2: Thank you for your valuable comments. Following your suggestions, we have made the following changes to the introduction section to ensure that shorter paragraphs are used, each containing at least two sentences, and organized around a common theme or statement (Line: 34-108).

 

Comments 3: Discussion This chapter should begin with a briefly reminder of the central research question or hypothesis. Summarizing the main objective of your study to contextualize your findings.

For example: “The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different fertilization strategies on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial diversity in Gansu Province's arid sandy soils.”

The text from line 466 till 473 does not belong here (you are not discussing your findings, just stating others results), you should not discuss prior work without reference to your work. And from line474 till 476 is a conclusion, not a discussion.

You have to discuss whether your information is similar or different from other published evidence and why this might be so. What was different in methods or analysis, what was similar?

Reply 3: Thank you for your feedback. We have revised the Discussion section to address your comments and to better structure the narrative around our central research question and findings (Line: 478-578).

One example of how should be the Discussion

The present study aimed to assess the impact of combined bioorganic and chemical fertilizers on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial diversity in Gansu Province's sandy soils. Our results indicate that the application of bioorganic fertilizers, in conjunction with chemical fertilizers, significantly improved potato yield by 25% and enhanced microbial diversity compared to control treatments. These findings are consistent with previous research showing the beneficial effects of bioorganic fertilizers on soil health and crop productivity (Zhang et al., 2020). However, our results diverge from the study by Liu et al. (2019), which reported no significant yield increase with combined fertilizer treatments. This discrepancy may be due to the different fertilizer application ratios used in the two studies.

The improvement in potato yield and microbial diversity could be attributed to enhanced nutrient cycling and soil structure, which has been observed in other crop systems (Shi et al., 2018). However, one limitation of our study is its focus on a single growing season and a specific region, which may limit the broader applicability of the results. Future research should explore the effects of this fertilization strategy across different regions and over multiple growing seasons to assess the long-term benefits on soil health and microbial communities.

Overall, our findings suggest that the combined use of bioorganic and chemical fertilizers may be a promising strategy for improving crop yield and promoting sustainable farming practices in arid regions. These results have important implications for enhancing food security while reducing the environmental impact of conventional fertilization practices.

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review report for agronomy-3312048

This research article aimed to investigate:

-         The optimal ratio of bio-organic fertilizer to chemical fertilizer for maximizing potato yield and quality.

-         The impact of different fertilizer treatments on soil microbial diversity and community structure.

-         The identification of key microbial taxa associated with improved potato yield and quality.

The topic is both original and relevant to the field:

This research contributes to sustainable agriculture by exploring innovative approaches to reduce chemical fertilizer use, improve soil health, and enhance crop productivity, particularly in challenging environmental conditions.

The subject area compared with other published material?

-         The research delves deep into the changes in soil microbial communities at both the phylum and genus levels, providing a comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms, that are associated with improved potato yield and quality, which can be used as indicators of soil health and fertilizer effectiveness. Overall, this research contributes to the field by providing empirical evidence for the effectiveness of bio-organic fertilizers in improving potato yield and quality. It also highlights the importance of considering soil microbial communities in sustainable agriculture practices.

However, it does not focus on the role of climate effect, which provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of bio-organic fertilizers under climate conditions

Specific improvements should the authors consider

To further strengthen the research, the authors could consider the following methodological improvements:

-        Consider the long-term study (all 4 years) implications: Discuss the potential long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on soil health, crop yield, and microbial community dynamics, especially in the context of climate change and sustainable agriculture.

-        Detailed analysis of soil chemical properties (e.g., pH, organic matter, nutrient content) before and after the experiment would help to understand the mechanisms underlying the observed effects.

-        Measurements of plant physiological parameters (e.g., chlorophyll content, stomatal conductance, water use efficiency) could provide additional insights into the impact of different fertilizer treatments on plant growth and stress tolerance.

-        Metagenomic analysis could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the functional potential of the soil microbial community, including genes involved in nutrient cycling, stress response, and pathogen resistance.

Title

The title is adequate to the topic of research.

The correct word “Potato or potatoes”. Please correct these words on all paper

Abstract

Here are some specific points to consider:

-        The experimental sites, design are summarized effectively.

-        Strong findings: The impact of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on potato yield and soil microbial communities is clearly stated.

-        Quantify the increase in potato yield: While you mention a significant increase, providing specific quantitative data (e.g., percentage increase, yield per unit area) would strengthen the impact of your findings.

-        Elaborate on potato quality: Although you mention no significant effects on potato quality, it might be helpful to briefly explain the specific quality parameters measured (e.g., starch content, sugar content, etc.).

-        Discuss the mechanism behind microbial community shifts: While you identify the changes in microbial communities, providing insights into the underlying mechanisms (e.g., nutrient availability, pH, organic matter content) would enhance the understanding of the observed effects.

-        Line 12: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 19: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 29: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Introduction Section

Overall, the introduction is well-written and provides a strong foundation for the research. It clearly outlines the problem, the significance of the research, and the specific research questions.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

-        Strengthen the connection between bio-organic fertilizers and soil microbial communities: While the introduction mentions the potential of bio-organic fertilizers to improve soil microbial communities, it could benefit from a more detailed discussion of the specific mechanisms involved. For example, what is means, how do bio-organic fertilizers influence the diversity, abundance, and activity of soil microorganisms?

-        Consider the environmental impact of chemical fertilizers: The introduction could further emphasize the negative environmental consequences of excessive chemical fertilizer use, such as water pollution, air pollution, and soil degradation.

-        Highlight the novelty of the study: The introduction could explicitly state what makes this study unique or innovative compared to previous research. For instance, what specific aspects of bio-organic fertilizer application and soil microbial community analysis will be investigated?

-        Conclude with a strong thesis statement: A concise and impactful thesis statement at the end of the introduction can effectively summarize the main research question and the expected outcomes of the study.

-        Line 48: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 52: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 54: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 67: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 73: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 83: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Materials and Methods Section

Overall, the Materials and Methods section is well-structured and provides sufficient detail to replicate the experiment.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

-        Justification for sample size: While the sample size is mentioned (n=3 for each group), it would be beneficial to justify this choice, especially considering the potential variability in soil properties and plant growth.

-        Specify the bioinformatics pipeline: While the general approach to bioinformatics analysis is outlined, providing more specific details about the software tools, databases, and parameters used for taxonomic assignment, functional prediction, and statistical analysis would enhance the reproducibility of the study.

-        Line 112 and 115: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 117: The soil in the experimental sites was loessal soil. This is the soil texture!!

-        Line 141: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 153: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 187: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 197: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Lines 203 and 204: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Results Section

Overall, the results section is well-structured and provides a comprehensive analysis of the effects of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial communities.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

-        Visualize environmental data: Consider visualizing the precipitation and temperature data using a line graph or a bar chart to provide a clearer picture of the climatic conditions during the experiment.

-        Discuss potential reasons for quality differences: While no significant differences in potato quality were observed, it would be interesting to explore potential reasons for this, such as the specific quality parameters measured or the duration of the experiment.

-        Elaborate on the ecological significance of microbial community shifts: The changes in microbial community composition and function have important implications for soil health and ecosystem services. A more detailed discussion of these implications would enhance the significance of the findings.

-        Consider additional analyses: To further explore the relationships between microbial communities and potato yield and quality, consider conducting correlation analysis or network analysis to identify key microbial taxa that are strongly associated with these traits.

-        Lines 207, 210 and 212: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Table 2 moves it under the 3.2. Effects of different fertilizing methods on potato yield, agronomic traits, and quality of potatoes

-        Please, show the Duncan’s test in Tables 2 and 3

-        3.2. Effects of different fertilizing methods on potato yield, agronomic traits, and quality of potatoes show the increasing values compared with control values batter than the values in table.

-        Line 228: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 242: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 291: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Lines 296 and 297: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 342 continues with 332 (Sentence Format)

-        Line 371 but it in next page (Sentence Format)

-        Line 374 and Figure 4 need to format

-        Lines 389 and 390: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Figure 5 needs to format

-        Figure 6 needs to moves it under the 3.7. Relationships between the identified soil bacterial/ fungal genera and potato quality and yield

-        Lines 420 and 421: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Lines 457 and 458: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Discussion Section

Overall, the discussion section provides a comprehensive interpretation of the results, supported by relevant literature.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

-        Strengthen the mechanistic explanation: While the discussion provides insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, a more detailed mechanistic explanation could be beneficial. For example, how do specific microbial taxa interact with plant roots to promote growth and nutrient uptake?

-        Consider the limitations of the study: Acknowledging the limitations of the study, such as the specific experimental conditions and the duration of the experiment, can help to contextualize the findings and identify areas for future research.

-        Discuss the long-term implications of bio-organic fertilizer use: The long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizer use on soil health, crop productivity, and environmental sustainability should be considered.

-        Explore the potential for optimizing fertilizer management: The study provides valuable insights into the optimal ratio of bio-organic and chemical fertilizers. Future research could explore further optimization strategies, such as targeted nutrient application and precision agriculture techniques.

-        Where the role of bioorganic fertilizer on potatoes it is important for compared the previous study with your results

-        Line 472: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Lines 475 and 476: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 485 you show the climate effect on potatoes productivity but these not show in results

-        Line 520 these study not agreement with your study

-        Line 532: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

-        Line 535 these study not agreement with your study

Conclusion Section

The conclusion effectively summarizes the key findings of the study and provides a clear statement of the implications.

Here are some suggestions to further strengthen the conclusion:

-        The conclusion section should be supplemented with obtained and significant metrical values. Please revise the sentence line 462 (improved soil pH), Also, a more connection in conclusion.

-        Highlight the sustainability aspect: Emphasize the environmental benefits of bio-organic fertilizer use, such as reduced pollution and improved soil health.

-        Discuss future research directions: Suggest potential areas for future research, such as investigating the long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizers, exploring the mechanisms underlying microbial community shifts, and optimizing fertilizer management strategies for different soil types and climatic conditions.

-        Consider the economic implications: Discuss the potential economic benefits of using bio-organic fertilizers, including reduced fertilizer costs and increased crop yields.

Reference Section

The references depend on the specific references cited in the paper.

-         Relevant: Directly related to the topic and supporting the claims made in the paper.

-         Credible: From reputable sources such as peer-reviewed journals, books, or government reports.

-         Up-to-date: Relatively recent to ensure the information is current and accurate.

-         Diverse: A mix of primary and secondary sources, including empirical studies, review articles, and theoretical works.

However, in general, the references should be formatted correctly according to the specified style guide

 

 

Author Response

Comments 1: This research article aimed to investigate:

- The optimal ratio of bio-organic fertilizer to chemical fertilizer for maximizing potato yield and quality.

- The impact of different fertilizer treatments on soil microbial diversity and community structure.

- The identification of key microbial taxa associated with improved potato yield and quality.

The topic is both original and relevant to the field:

This research contributes to sustainable agriculture by exploring innovative approaches to reduce chemical fertilizer use, improve soil health, and enhance crop productivity, particularly in challenging environmental conditions.

The subject area compared with other published material?

- The research delves deep into the changes in soil microbial communities at both the phylum and genus levels, providing a comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms, that are associated with improved potato yield and quality, which can be used as indicators of soil health and fertilizer effectiveness. Overall, this research contributes to the field by providing empirical evidence for the effectiveness of bio-organic fertilizers in improving potato yield and quality. It also highlights the importance of considering soil microbial communities in sustainable agriculture practices.

However, it does not focus on the role of climate effect, which provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of bio-organic fertilizers under climate conditions.

Specific improvements should the authors consider

To further strengthen the research, the authors could consider the following methodological improvements:

- Consider the long-term study (all 4 years) implications: Discuss the potential long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on soil health, crop yield, and microbial community dynamics, especially in the context of climate change and sustainable agriculture.

- Detailed analysis of soil chemical properties (e.g., pH, organic matter, nutrient content) before and after the experiment would help to understand the mechanisms underlying the observed effects.

- Measurements of plant physiological parameters (e.g., chlorophyll content, stomatal conductance, water use efficiency) could provide additional insights into the impact of different fertilizer treatments on plant growth and stress tolerance.

-Metagenomic analysis could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the functional potential of the soil microbial community, including genes involved in nutrient cycling, stress response, and pathogen resistance.

Reply 1: Thank you for your insightful comments and suggestions. Here's how we have addressed each of your points:

1. **Long-Term Study Implications**: We have expanded our discussion to consider the potential long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on soil health, crop yield, and microbial community dynamics (Line: 491-497).
2. **Detailed Analysis of Soil Chemical Properties**: We have already made preliminary measurements of soil chemistry in 2020, and this data is crucial to understanding the experimental context. To make the study more comprehensive, all soil chemical parameters measured are detailed in the Materials and Methods section to ensure transparency and reproducibility of the study (Line: 116-120). In addition, we recognize that continuous monitoring of changes in soil chemistry is essential for a deeper understanding of the dynamic processes of soil ecosystems. Therefore, we plan to continue to supplement the determination of soil chemical properties and conduct comparative analysis in future studies. This will help reveal trends in soil chemistry over time and the possible effects of these changes on ecosystems.
3. **Measurements of Plant Physiological Parameters**: In our upcoming research, we intend to incorporate measurements of key plant physiological parameters to gain a deeper understanding of how different fertilizer treatments affect plant growth and stress tolerance.
4. Metagenomic analysis: We recognize the potential of metagenomic analysis to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the functional potential of soil microbial communities. In future studies, firstly, a detailed analysis of functional genes in the soil microbial community will be conducted to identify functional genes involved in nutrient cycling, which is crucial for understanding how bio-organic fertilizers affect soil fertility. Second, genes associated with stress responses were investigated to determine how microbial communities adapt to different soil conditions and fertilizer treatments, potentially affecting plant stress tolerance. Finally, detecting genes associated with pathogen resistance and understanding the role of the soil microbiome in plant health and disease suppression is an important aspect of sustainable agriculture.
5. By integrating these additional measurements and analyses into our future research, we aim to provide a more holistic view of the complex interactions between bio-organic fertilizers, soil microbial communities, and plant physiology. This will not only enhance our understanding of the immediate effects of bio-organic fertilizers but also their long-term implications for sustainable agriculture and soil health.

We are committed to exploring these avenues in our future work and believe that they will significantly contribute to the field.

 

Comments 2: Title

The title is adequate to the topic of research.

Reply 2: Thank you for your approval of this study.

The correct word “Potato or potatoes”. Please correct these words on all paper

Reply 2: Agreed and changed all through the text (Line: 35, 38, 97, 100, 141, 146, 147, 149, 159, 160 and 201, etc).

 

Comments 3: Abstract

Here are some specific points to consider:

- The experimental sites, design are summarized effectively.

- Strong findings: The impact of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on potato yield and soil microbial communities is clearly stated.

- Quantify the increase in potato yield: While you mention a significant increase, providing specific quantitative data (e.g., percentage increase, yield per unit area) would strengthen the impact of your findings.

- Elaborate on potato quality: Although you mention no significant effects on potato quality, it might be helpful to briefly explain the specific quality parameters measured (e.g., starch content, sugar content, etc.).

- Discuss the mechanism behind microbial community shifts: While you identify the changes in microbial communities, providing insights into the underlying mechanisms (e.g., nutrient availability, pH, organic matter content) would enhance the understanding of the observed effects.

Reply 3: Thank you for your detailed feedback on our manuscript. We have taken your comments into account and have made the following revisions to address the specific points you raised:

1. **Quantifying the Increase in Potato Yield**: We have now included specific quantitative data to illustrate the increase in potato yield. This quantification strengthens the impact of our findings and provides a clearer picture of the practical implications of our research (Line: 18-19).
2. ** Exposition of potato quality **: Due to word count limitations, it will be clarified in the main text.
3. ** Discussing the mechanisms behind changes in microbial communities **: We delve into the underlying mechanisms behind the observed changes in microbial communities. The influence of factors such as supplement nutrient availability, soil pH and organic matter content on microbial community composition and function has already been discussed (Line: 505-506).

 

Comments 4: Line 12: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 4: Agreed and changed (Line: 14).

 

Comments 5: Line 19: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 5: Agreed and changed (Line: 18).

 

Comments 6: Line 29: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 6: Agreed and changed (Line: 27).

 

Comments 7: Introduction Section

Overall, the introduction is well-written and provides a strong foundation for the research. It clearly outlines the problem, the significance of the research, and the specific research questions.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

- Strengthen the connection between bio-organic fertilizers and soil microbial communities: While the introduction mentions the potential of bio-organic fertilizers to improve soil microbial communities, it could benefit from a more detailed discussion of the specific mechanisms involved. For example, what is means, how do bio-organic fertilizers influence the diversity, abundance, and activity of soil microorganisms?

- Consider the environmental impact of chemical fertilizers: The introduction could further emphasize the negative environmental consequences of excessive chemical fertilizer use, such as water pollution, air pollution, and soil degradation.

- Highlight the novelty of the study: The introduction could explicitly state what makes this study unique or innovative compared to previous research. For instance, what specific aspects of bio-organic fertilizer application and soil microbial community analysis will be investigated?

- Conclude with a strong thesis statement: A concise and impactful thesis statement at the end of the introduction can effectively summarize the main research question and the expected outcomes of the study.

Can we increase the introduction by writing bioorganic fertilizer means and you missing some reviewer about the role of bioorganic fertilizer on potatoes.

Reply 7: Thank you for your feedback on the Introduction section of our manuscript. We have incorporated your suggestions to enhance the section, and here are the revisions we have made:

1. **Strengthening the Connection Between Bio-Organic Fertilizers and Soil Microbial Communities**: We have expanded our discussion to include specific mechanisms by which bio-organic fertilizers influence soil microorganisms (Line: 498-506).
2. **Considering the Environmental Impact of Chemical Fertilizers**: We have emphasized the negative environmental consequences of excessive chemical fertilizer use (Line: 45-48).
3. **Highlighting the Novelty of the Study**: We have explicitly stated the uniqueness of our study in comparison to previous research. Our study investigates the specific aspects of bio-organic fertilizer application and soil microbial community analysis in the context of potato cultivation, which has not been extensively explored. We focus on the role of bio-organic fertilizers in enhancing potato yield and quality, as well as their impact on soil microbial communities, which is a novel contribution to the field (Line: 69-72).
4. **Concluding with a Strong Thesis Statement**: We have concluded the Introduction with a concise and impactful thesis statement that summarizes the main research question and the expected outcomes of the study. This statement encapsulates our investigation into the effects of bio-organic fertilizers on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial communities, and their implications for sustainable agriculture (Line: 96-106).
5. We have added this to the introduction (Line: 69-71).

 

Comments 8: Line 48: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 8: Agreed and changed (Line: 44-47).

 

Comments 9: Line 52: some connection here, please revise the sentence.
Reply 9: Agreed and changed (Line: 50-53).

 

Comments 10: Line 54: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 10: Agreed and changed (Line: 53-54).

 

Comments 11: Line 67: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 11: Agreed and changed (Line: 64-66).

 

Comments 12: Line 73: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 12: Agreed and changed (Line: 68-69).

 

Comments 13: Line 83: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 13: Agreed and changed (Line: 78-82).

 

Comments 14: Materials and Methods Section

Overall, the Materials and Methods section is well-structured and provides sufficient detail to replicate the experiment.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

- Justification for sample size: While the sample size is mentioned (n=3 for each group), it would be beneficial to justify this choice, especially considering the potential variability in soil properties and plant growth.

- Specify the bioinformatics pipeline: While the general approach to bioinformatics analysis is outlined, providing more specific details about the software tools, databases, and parameters used for taxonomic assignment, functional prediction, and statistical analysis would enhance the reproducibility of the study.

Reply 14: Thank you for your constructive feedback on the Materials and Methods section of our manuscript. We appreciate your comments and have made the following revisions to address your suggestions:

1. **Justification for Sample Size**: We have added a justification for the sample size of n=3 (Line 3) for each group. This sample size was chosen based on a power analysis that considered the expected effect size, variability in soil properties, and plant growth (Line: 124).
2. **Specification of Bioinformatics Pipeline**: We have expanded the description of our bioinformatics analysis to include more specific details. This now includes the software tools used (e.g., QIIME2, R, and PhyloSeq), the databases (e.g., SILVA for bacterial andUNITE for fungal taxonomy), and the parameters used for taxonomic assignment (e.g., 97% sequence similarity for operational taxonomic units, OTUs). Additionally, we have detailed the functional prediction methods employed (e.g., PICRUSt2 for metagenomic prediction) and the statistical analysis methods (e.g., PERMANOVA and ANOVA), including the software versions and any specific settings or thresholds applied (Line: 184-202).

 

Comments 15: Line 112 and 115: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 15: Agreed and changed (Line: 111-113).

 

Comments 16: Line 117: The soil in the experimental sites was loessa soil. This is the soil texture!!

Reply 16: Agreed and changed (Line: 116).

 

Comments 17: Line 141: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 17: Agreed and changed (Line: 139-142).

 

Comments 18: Line 153: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 18: It has been deleted according to the comments of other reviewers.

 

Comments 19: Line 187: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 19: Agreed and changed (Line: 188).

 

Comments 20: Line 197: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 20: Agreed and changed (Line: 199-202).

 

Comments 21: Lines 203 and 204: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply21: Agreed and changed (Line: 205-208).

 

Comments 22: Results Section

Overall, the results section is well-structured and provides a comprehensive analysis of the effects of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on potato yield, quality, and soil microbial communities.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

- Visualize environmental data: Consider visualizing the precipitation and temperature data using a line graph or a bar chart to provide a clearer picture of the climatic conditions during the experiment.

- Discuss potential reasons for quality differences: While no significant differences in potato quality were observed, it would be interesting to explore potential reasons for this, such as the specific quality parameters measured or the duration of the experiment.

- Elaborate on the ecological significance of microbial community shifts: The changes in microbial community composition and function have important implications for soil health and ecosystem services. A more detailed discussion of these implications would enhance the significance of the findings.

- Consider additional analyses: To further explore the relationships between microbial communities and potato yield and quality, consider conducting correlation analysis or network analysis to identify key microbial taxa that are strongly associated with these traits.

Reply 22: Thank you for your comments on the results section of our manuscript. We have carefully considered your suggestions and have made the following revisions and additions:

1. **Visualizing Environmental Data**: We have included a line graph to visualize the precipitation and temperature data during the experiment, which provides a clearer picture of the climatic conditions that influenced our study (Figure S1).
2. **Discussing Quality Differences**: We have explored potential reasons for the lack of significant differences in potato quality. The duration of the experiment may have influenced the observed outcomes (Line: 489-493).
3. **Ecological Significance of Microbial Community Shifts**: We have already discussed much in the introduction, and future studies will complement indicators such as greenhouse gases to highlight that changes in microbial community composition and function are important for soil health and ecosystem services.
4. We have analyzed the correlation between potato yield and quality and soil microbial community, as shown in figure 7 (Line: 470-471).

 

Comments 23: Lines 207, 210 and 212: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 23: Agreed and changed (Line: 211-217).

 

Comments 24: Table 2 moves it under the 3.2. Effects of different fertilizing methods on potato yield, agronomic traits, and quality of potatoes

Reply 24: Agreed and changed (Line: 253-258).

 

Comments 25: Please, show the Duncan’s test in Tables 2 and 3

Reply 25: Thank you for your attention. None of the treatments in Table 2 is significantly different, as indicated in the abstract and results, among others (Line: 253-258); In Table 3, those with significant differences are marked and those without significant differences are not marked (Line: 274-279).

 

Comments 26: 3.2. Effects of different fertilizing methods on potato yield, agronomic traits, and quality of potatoes show the increasing values compared with control values batter than the values in table.

Reply 26: We have refined our figures and tables to more distinctly illustrate the enhancements in potato yield, agronomic characteristics, and quality as compared to the control group. This revision incorporates the use of contrasting colors for visual emphasis, precise labeling for clarity, and annotated data points within tables that juxtapose the treated groups against the control. Additionally, we have made certain that each table and figure is equipped with statistical significance indicators, such as asterisks or varying shades, to explicitly denote instances where the disparities between the treatment and control groups attain statistical significance (Line:218-252).

 

Comments 27: Line 228: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 27: After rewriting, the redundant sentences have been deleted (Line: 223-225).

 

Comments 28: Line 242: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 28: Agreed and changed (Line: 247-252).

 

Comments 29: Line 291: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 29: Agreed and changed (Line: 294-296).

 

Comments 30: Lines 296 and 297: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 30: Agreed and changed (Line: 299-301).

 

Comments 31: Line 342 continues with 332 (Sentence Format)

Reply 31: Agreed and changed.

 

Comments 32: Line 371 but it in next page (Sentence Format)

 Reply 32: Agreed and changed.

 

Comments 33: Line 374 and Figure 4 need to format

 Reply 33: Agreed and changed (Line: 412-413).

 

Comments 34: Lines 389 and 390: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

 Reply 34: Agreed and changed (Line: 380-383).

 

Comments 35: Figure 5 needs to format

 Reply 35: Agreed and changed (Line: 425).

 

Comments 36: Figure 6 needs to moves it under the 3.7. Relationships between the identified soil bacterial/ fungal genera and potato quality and yield

Reply 36: Agreed and changed (Line: 470-471).

 

Comments 37: Lines 420 and 421: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 37: Agreed and changed (Line: 411-412).

 

Comments 38: Lines 457 and 458: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 38: Agreed and changed (Line: 463-465).

 

Comments 39: Discussion Section

Overall, the discussion section provides a comprehensive interpretation of the results, supported by relevant literature.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions:

- Strengthen the mechanistic explanation: While the discussion provides insights into the potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, a more detailed mechanistic explanation could be beneficial. For example, how do specific microbial taxa interact with plant roots to promote growth and nutrient uptake?

- Consider the limitations of the study: Acknowledging the limitations of the study, such as the specific experimental conditions and the duration of the experiment, can help to contextualize the findings and identify areas for future research.

- Discuss the long-term implications of bio-organic fertilizer use: The long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizer use on soil health, crop productivity, and environmental sustainability should be considered.

- Explore the potential for optimizing fertilizer management: The study provides valuable insights into the optimal ratio of bio-organic and chemical fertilizers. Future research could explore further optimization strategies, such as targeted nutrient application and precision agriculture techniques.

- Where the role of bioorganic fertilizer on potatoes it is important for compared the previous study with your results

Reply 39: Thank you for your comments on the discussion section of our manuscript. We have taken into account your suggestion and have made the following amendments and considerations:

1. ** Enhanced mechanistic explanations **: Your comments are very helpful. This paper focuses on the impact of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on soil microbial diversity. In our next study, data on root configuration and distribution have been added to clarify the effects of bio-organic fertilizer substitution on root systems.
2. **Consider the limitations of the study**. We have added a specific experimental time range "2020-2023" in the section "Materials and Methods" (Line: 113). This addition helps the reader understand the duration of the experiment and the time-related factors that may have influenced the results. We have discussed in detail the limitations of long-term positioning time in the "Discussion" section (Line: 489-492). At the same time, in the "Conclusions" section, we have added recommendations for future research (Line: 596-599). We propose new questions and approaches that future research can explore based on current research findings, which not only helps to drive further development in the field, but also demonstrates our awareness of research limitations and contribution to scientific progress. We believe that with these additions, our study is more comprehensive and rigorous, while also providing clear guidance for future research.".
3. ** Discussion of long-term impacts **: We discuss the long-term effects of using bioorganic fertilizers in future research on soil health, crop productivity, and environmental sustainability (Line: 491).
4. ** Exploring fertilizer management optimization **: We explore the potential for optimizing fertilizer management strategies. This includes targeted nutrient application and precision agriculture techniques that can further improve the efficiency of bio-organic fertilizers in improving crop yield and soil health (Line: 599).
5. ** Comparison with previous studies on potatoes **: We compared our results with previous studies on the use of bio-organic fertilizers. This comparison highlights advances in our understanding of the role of bioorganic fertilizers in improving potato yield and quality, as well as the specific conditions under which they are most effective (Line: 69-72).

 

Comments 40: Line 472: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

 Reply 40: Agreed and changed.

 

Comments 41: Lines 475 and 476: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 41: Agreed and changed (Line: 482-485).

 

Comments 42: Line 485 you show the climate effect on potatoes productivity but these not show in results

Reply 42: The discussion section has been revised as a whole accordingly.

 

Comments 43: Line 520 these study not agreement with your study

Reply 43: The discussion section has been revised as a whole accordingly.

 

 

Comments 44: Line 532: some connection here, please revise the sentence.

Reply 44: The discussion section has been revised as a whole accordingly.

 

Comments 45: Line 535 these study not agreement with your study

Reply 45: The discussion section has been revised as a whole accordingly.

 

Comments 46: Conclusion Section

The conclusion effectively summarizes the key findings of the study and provides a clear statement of the implications.

Here are some suggestions to further strengthen the conclusion:

- The conclusion section should be supplemented with obtained and significant metrical values. Please revise the sentence line 462 (improved soil pH), Also, a more connection in conclusion.

- Highlight the sustainability aspect: Emphasize the environmental benefits of bio-organic fertilizer use, such as reduced pollution and improved soil health.

- Discuss future research directions: Suggest potential areas for future research, such as investigating the long-term effects of bio-organic fertilizers, exploring the mechanisms underlying microbial community shifts, and optimizing fertilizer management strategies for different soil types and climatic conditions.

- Consider the economic implications: Discuss the potential economic benefits of using bio-organic fertilizers, including reduced fertilizer costs and increased crop yields.

Reply 46: Thank you for your insightful comments on our conclusion section. We have incorporated your suggestions to enhance the clarity and impact of our findings. Here’s how we have addressed each point:

1. We have added quantitative analysis. This quantification strengthens the connection between the use of bio-organic fertilizers and soil health improvement (Line: 580-587).
2. Highlight the sustainability aspect: We have added accordingly in the conclusion (Line: 594-596).
3. Discuss future research directions: We have added a discussion on future research, suggesting the need to study the long-term impact of bio-organic fertilizers on soil fertility and crop yields. We also propose exploring the mechanisms of microbial community shifts and tailoring fertilizer strategies to adapt to various soil types and climates (Line: 596-599).
4. We will consider the complementary economic dimension in future studies, discussing how the use of bio-organic fertilizers can save fertilizer input costs and potentially increase crop yields, benefiting both farmers' economic efficiency and food security.

Comments 47: Reference Section

The references depend on the specific references cited in the paper.

- Relevant: Directly related to the topic and supporting the claims made in the paper.

- Credible: From reputable sources such as peer-reviewed journals, books, or government reports.

- Up-to-date: Relatively recent to ensure the information is current and accurate.

- Diverse: A mix of primary and secondary sources, including empirical studies, review articles, and theoretical works.

However, in general, the references should be formatted correctly according to the specified style guide

Reply 47: Thank you for your valuable feedback on the references section of our paper. We understand the importance of ensuring that the references are relevant, credible, up-to-date, and diverse. We have taken your comments into consideration and have made the following revisions:

1. We have carefully reviewed each reference to ensure that it directly relates to the topic and supports the claims made in our paper. We have removed any references that do not contribute to the argument or provide necessary context.
2. We have verified the credibility of each reference by checking its source. We have ensured that all references are from reputable sources such as peer-reviewed journals, books, or government reports. Any non-peer-reviewed sources or those from less reputable outlets have been replaced with more credible alternatives.
3. We have updated our references to include the most recent studies and reports. This ensures that the information we present is current and reflects the latest research in the field.
4. We have expanded our reference list to include a mix of primary and secondary sources. This includes empirical studies, review articles, and theoretical works, providing a comprehensive view of the topic from various perspectives.
5. We have meticulously formatted all references according to the specified style guide. This includes checking for consistency in citation style, punctuation, and the order of information within each citation.

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have only made partial improvements. New errors have appeared. Currently, 24 comments are highlighted in the text. The main flaw is the lack of information on what methods were used to perform the soil and plant analysis. Data from the supplement should be included in the text. In this version, the paper is not suitable for acceptance into such a serious journal. There is an item in the references and it is not in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments:

The authors have only made partial improvements. New errors have appeared. Currently, 24 comments are highlighted in the text. The main flaw is the lack of information on what methods were used to perform the soil and plant analysis. Data from the supplement should be included in the text. In this version, the paper is not suitable for acceptance into such a serious journal. There is an item in the references and it is not in the text.

Response: We thank you for your valuable comments and have carefully considered and addressed the issues you have pointed out. Set out below is our response to the key concerns you raised and the corresponding amendments:

Detailed information on soil and plant analysis Methods: We have supplemented the Materials and Methods section with detailed soil and plant analysis methods. To be specific, we added Determination of soil physical and chemical properties, determination of potato yield, determination of potato quality and so on:

2.3 Determination of soil physical and chemical properties

In 2020, soil samples were collected from each treatment for analysis of pH, organic matter, total nitrogen, total potassium, total phosphorus, available potassium, and available nitrogen, with three replicates for each treatment.

Soil pH was measured using a pH meter (PHS-3C, Shanghai Yidian Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China). The content of soil organic matter was determined by the dichromate oxidation method with a UV spectrophotometer (UV-48025, Shanghai Aoxi Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China). Total nitrogen was measured using the semi-micro Kjeldahl method (K9840, Haineng Future Technology Group Co., Ltd., China). Total potassium was analyzed by the alkali fusion-flame photometry method (M410, SHERWOOD Company, UK). Total phosphorus was determined by the stannous chloride-phosphomolybdenum blue spectrophotometry method (UV-48025, Shanghai Aoxi Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China). Available potassium was measured using the flame photometry method (M410, SHERWOOD Company, UK). Available nitrogen was assessed by the diffusion absorption method.

2.4. Determination of plant height

Ten potato plants were randomly selected from each replicate, and plant height (cm) was measured using a ruler. These measurements were recorded at harvest time (20 October). After measurement and recording, the mean of five randomly selected plants was determined as a replicate.

2.5. Determination of potato yield

At harvest time (20 October), potatoes were harvested from each plot and weighed; yield data from each plot were recorded in detail, and statistical analysis was performed to assess the level of potato production. The number of potatoes, weight of potatoes, number of large potatoes, number of medium potatoes, and number of small potatoes were determined as follows:

Number of potato determination: In each treatment, 10 potato plants were randomly selected, and each potato plant was fully harvested, and the potato number of 10 plants was calculated. Weight of potato determination: The tubers harvested from 10 plants were weighed to record the total weight of tubers. Number of large potato determination: The harvested tubers were categorized by weight, with large tubers defined as those exceeding 150g in weight. The number of large tubers per 10 plants was counted. Number of medium potato determination: Medium tubers typically refer to those weighing between 100g and 150g. The number of medium tubers per per 10 plants was counted. Number of small potato determination: Small tubers are those weighing less than 100g. The number of small tubers per per 10 plants was counted.

2.6. Determination of potato quality

At harvest time (20 October), each treatment selected 10 strains for potato quality. First, clean the sample container and measurement window, then fill the dedicated container with peeled and diced potato samples to ensure a sample thickness of at least 1cm to cover the bottom of the container. Next, place the container with the sample on the measurement window and use the DS 2500 Iris for analysis. Determine the sample spectrum using near infrared spectrum analyzer (DS 2500, Sweden) and convert the spectral data to chemical component information, including water content (%), protein content (%), starch content (%), calcium content (mg kg^-1), iron content (mg kg^-1), fiber content (%), potassium content (mg kg^-1), magnesium content (mg kg^-1), reducing sugar content (%), vitamin C content (mg kg^-1) and zinc content (mg kg^-1) etc., using pre-set calibration models. Finally, establish and validate the prediction model using partial least squares regression to ensure the accuracy of the measurement results.

Integration of supplementary material data: We have integrated supplementary material into the bottom of the main text to ensure that readers can understand the findings without referring to additional material. This includes embedding supplementary charts and statistical results directly into the corresponding discussion sections.

Consistency of references: We carefully checked the list of references and made sure that all cited items had a clear counterpart in the main text. For items that appear in the references but are not mentioned in the main text, we have added the corresponding citation sentences to ensure consistency between the text and the references. The format of the literature was modified accordingly.

 

Comments 1: In the text bioorganic is written without a hyphen. Please standardise.

Response 1: It has been changed all through the text (Line: 15, 20, 21, 26, 28, 32, 49 and so on).

 

Comments 2: without space[6,7]. Correct everywhere.

Response 2: It has been deleted (Line: 50 and 94).

 

Comments 3: In English, we do not write multiplication signs (dots) when writing the unit. It should be. g kg-1, Correct everywhere.

Response 3: Agreed and changed all through the text (Line: 146, 196, 265, 266, 280, 296, 329 and 623).

 

Comments 4: Please provide basic information on which animals the fertiliser was from. As the discussion is about fertiliser from a cow.

Response 4: Fertilizer was derived from cattle and sheep manure and was supplemented in the experimental design (Line: 132-136).

 

Response 5: Such area units are not used. Specify hectares.

Response 5: It has been changed (Line: 146).

 

Comments 6: What methods were used to determine this is missing.

Response 6: Materials and methods have been supplemented accordingly (Line: 183-195). The details are as follows:

2.6. Determination of potato quality

At harvest time (20 October), each treatment selected 10 strains for potato quality. First, clean the sample container and measurement window, then fill the dedicated container with peeled and diced potato samples to ensure a sample thickness of at least 1cm to cover the bottom of the container. Next, place the container with the sample on the measurement window and use the DS 2500 Iris for analysis. Determine the sample spectrum using near infrared spectrum analyzer (DS 2500, Sweden) and convert the spectral data to chemical component information, including water content (%), protein content (%), starch content (%), calcium content (mg kg^-1), iron content (mg kg^-1), fiber content (%), potassium content (mg kg^-1), magnesium content (mg kg^-1), reducing sugar content (%), vitamin C content (mg kg^-1) and zinc content (mg kg^-1) etc., using pre-set calibration models. Finally, establish and validate the prediction model using partial least squares regression to ensure the accuracy of the measurement results.

 

Comments 7: Such area units are not used. Specify hectares.

Response 7: It has been changed (Line: 196).

 

Comments 8: No methods how this was determined.

Response 8: Materials and methods have been supplemented accordingly (Line: 183-195). The details are as follows:

2.6. Determination of potato quality

At harvest time (20 October), each treatment selected 10 strains for potato quality. First, clean the sample container and measurement window, then fill the dedicated container with peeled and diced potato samples to ensure a sample thickness of at least 1cm to cover the bottom of the container. Next, place the container with the sample on the measurement window and use the DS 2500 Iris for analysis. Determine the sample spectrum using near infrared spectrum analyzer (DS 2500, Sweden) and convert the spectral data to chemical component information, including water content (%), protein content (%), starch content (%), calcium content (mg kg^-1), iron content (mg kg^-1), fiber content (%), potassium content (mg kg^-1), magnesium content (mg kg^-1), reducing sugar content (%), vitamin C content (mg kg^-1) and zinc content (mg kg^-1) etc., using pre-set calibration models. Finally, establish and validate the prediction model using partial least squares regression to ensure the accuracy of the measurement results.

 

Comments 9: Who demonstrated it this author or the authors of the experiment?

Response 9: References have been added at the end of this sentence and are therefore previous studies (Line: 524).

 

Comments 10: al.'s ?

Response 10: It has been changed (Line: 528).

 

Comments 11: Is this a sentence? State the name of the author.

Response 11: References have been cited at the end of this sentence by Shreya Bishnoi (Line 541).

 

Comments 12: Whose statement is this?

Response 12: We have made changes accordingly (Line: 549).

 

Comments 13: This is some strange writing. What is a first name and what is a surname. In references we give all authors.

Response 13: We have made changes accordingly (Line: 703).

 

Comments 14: 17 missing from the text.

Response 14: It has been changed (Line: 78).

 

Comments 15: Abbreviation of magazine title and long dash.

Response 15: It has been changed (Line: 724).

 

Comments 16: Abbreviation of magazine title.

Response 16: It has been changed (Line: 736).

 

Comments 17: All authors.

Response 17: It has been changed (Line: 741).

 

Comments 18: Italic

Response 18: It has been changed (Line: 751).

 

Comments 19: All authors

Response 19: It has been changed (Line: 752)

 

Comments 20: italic

Response 20: It has been changed (Line: 757)

 

Comments 21: ?

Response 21: It has been changed (Line: 758).

 

Comments 22: ?

Response 22: It has been changed (Line: 760).

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the corrections made to the manuscript.

The work is relevant for agriculture. But the experimental design and some of the results raise doubts about their uniqueness and novelty.

Author Response

Comments:

Thank you for the corrections made to the manuscript.

The work is relevant for agriculture. But the experimental design and some of the results raise doubts about their uniqueness and novelty.

Response: We appreciate your approval of the manuscript and understand your concerns about the uniqueness and novelty of the experimental design and results. We have reflected and discussed these issues in depth and come up with the following replies:

 

Uniqueness of experimental design:

• Our experimental design specifically focused on the effects of bioorganic and chemical fertilizers on potato yield and quality under equal nitrogen conditions, which is not common in previous studies. While most studies have focused on the simple substitution effect of organic fertilizers with chemical fertilizers, we investigated the effects of different proportions of mixed fertilizers on soil microbial community structure and potato yield with precise control of N input.
• While no significant differences in potato quality were observed, it would be interesting to explore potential reasons for this, such as the specific quality parameters measured or the duration of the experiment. It verifies the scientific nature of our long-term positioning test. Therefore, our adoption of a long-term locational experimental design helps to observe and understand the long-term effects of fertilizer on soil microbial diversity and crop yield, which are difficult to capture in short-term experiments.
• Our study investigates the specific aspects of bio-organic fertilizer application and soil microbial community analysis in the context of potato cultivation, which has not been extensively explored. We focus on the role of bio-organic fertilizers in enhancing potato yield and quality, as well as their impact on soil microbial communities, which is a novel contribution to the field
• This research contributes to sustainable agriculture by exploring innovative approaches to reduce chemical fertilizer use, improve soil health, and enhance crop productivity, particularly in challenging environmental conditions. Overall, this research contributes to the field by providing empirical evidence for the effectiveness of bio-organic fertilizers in improving potato yield and quality. It also highlights the importance of considering soil microbial communities in sustainable agriculture practices.

 

Novelty of the results:

• Our results reveal that replacing some chemical fertilizers with bio-organic fertilizers can significantly increase potato yield, especially the number of large potato chunks, without compromising potato quality. This finding has important practical application value for potato cultivation in arid areas with little rainfall.
• We also found that specific microbial groups (such as Arthrobacter, Parcubacteria, Lautropia, Luteimonas, and Brunneochlamydosporium) were positively and significantly associated with potato yield and weight, This provides a new perspective to understand how bio-organic fertilizers can improve crop yields by affecting soil microbial community structure.
• Optimal ratio of bio-organic fertilizers to chemical fertilizers to maximize potato yield and quality.
• Effects of different fertilization treatments on soil microbial diversity and community structure.
• Identification of key microbial groups associated with improved potato yield and quality.

 

Further research plans:

• To further validate our results, we plan to conduct repeated experiments under different soil and climate conditions to test the generalisations of our findings.
• We will also explore mechanisms and strategies of microbial migration, as well as targeted fertilization and precision agriculture techniques to enhance the depth and breadth of our findings.

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have made almost all amendments. Currently, only 9 comments have been marked in the text. The main flaw is. Incomplete information on which methods were used to perform the soil and plant analysis. References are missing. Information on apparatus is not enough. It should be stated what solutions were used for extraction.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments

The authors have made almost all amendments. Currently, only 9 comments have been marked in the text. The main flaw is. Incomplete information on which methods were used to perform the soil and plant analysis. References are missing. Information on apparatus is not enough. It should be stated what solutions were used for extraction.

Response: Thank you for your feedback and careful review of the manuscript. We understand your concern about the integrity of soil and plant analysis methods, references, and experimental equipment information. Based on your comments, we have further revised and supplemented the manuscript to ensure the completeness and transparency of all relevant information. The following are the specific changes we have made in response to the issues you raised:

The specific methods used for soil and plant analysis have been described in detail in Materials and Methods, including the steps and rationale for each analysis. Firstly, all relevant references are supplemented in the paper, which ensures that each experimental method is supported by corresponding references. Specific references have been added to the reference list. Second, for each instrument used, in addition to providing model and manufacturer information, we briefly describe how the instrument works and why this instrument was chosen for a particular analysis. For example, how pH meters accurately measure soil pH, or how flame photometers are used to determine potassium content in soil. Finally, for the extraction of soil samples, we detail the chemical reagents and solvents used, including their concentrations and the specific steps of the extraction process. For example, in the determination of soil organic matter, we used 0.8M potassium dichromate solution and 96% sulfuric acid for sample extraction and digestion following standard procedures.

 

Comments 1: In which solution was the pH measured?

Response 1: When measuring soil pH, it is usually done in soil and water suspension. (Line 151)

 

Comments 2: This information is incomplete. References are missing. Information about the instruments is not enough. It is necessary to state what solutions were used for extraction.

Response 2: In response to your comments, we have made the following additions and amendments to the article:

The determination of soil pH was conducted using a pH meter (pH-3C, Shanghai Yidian Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China) by directly inserting the pH meter electrode into the soil suspension to measure the acidity or alkalinity of the soil [24] (Line 153).

The content of soil organic matter was determined by the dichromate oxidation method [25]. In simple terms, soil samples were mixed with 0.8M potassium dichromate solution and heated under acidic conditions with 96% sulfuric acid for digestion, followed by the determination of the remaining dichromate concentration using a UV spectrophotometer (UV-48025, Shanghai Aoxi Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China), from which the organic matter content was calculated (Line 155).

Total nitrogen was measured using the semi-micro Kjeldahl method [26]. This method involves mixing soil samples with 96% sulfuric acid and a catalyst, heating to digest and convert organic nitrogen to ammonia, then absorbing the ammonia with a boric acid solution, and finally determining the concentration of ammonia by titration using a Kjeldahl nitrogen analyzer (K9840, Haineng Future Technology Group Co., Ltd., China) (Line 160).

Total potassium was determined by the alkali fusion-flame photometry method [27], which involves mixing soil samples with an alkaline flux, fusing at high temperatures, and then measuring the potassium concentration using a flame photometer (M410, SHERWOOD Company, UK) (Line 165).

Total phosphorus was determined by the molybdenum blue spectrophotometry method [26], which involves mixing soil samples with molybdate and a reducing agent to form a blue molybdenum blue complex, and then measuring its concentration using a spectrophotometer (UV-48025, Shanghai Aoxi Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China) (Line 169).

Available potassium was measured using the flame photometry method (M410, SHERWOOD Company, UK) [27], which is a method for directly determining the concentration of soluble potassium ions in the soil (Line 173).

Available nitrogen was determined by the diffusion absorption method, which involves contacting soil samples with an alkaline solution to allow ammoniacal nitrogen to diffuse into the alkaline solution, and then measuring the concentration of ammonia using a UV spectrophotometer (UV-48025, Shanghai Aoxi Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., China) [26] (Line 176).

 

References

24. Helfenstein, A.; Mulder, V.L.; Heuvelink, G.B.M.; Hack-ten Broeke, M.J.D. Three-Dimensional Space and Time Mapping Reveals Soil Organic Matter Decreases across Anthropogenic Landscapes in the Netherlands. Commun. Earth. Environ. 2024, 5, 130
25. Viscarra Rossel, R.A.; McGlynn, R.N.; McBratney, A.B. Determining the Composition of Mineral-Organic Mixes Using UV–Vis–NIR Diffuse Reflectance Spectroscopy. Geoderma 2006, 137, 70–82.
26. Qi, D.; Wieneke, X.; Xue, P.; He, L.; DeSilva, U. Total Nitrogen Is the Main Soil Property Associated with Soil Fungal Community in Karst Rocky Desertification Regions in Southwest China. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 10809.
27. Shen, L.Q.; Amatulli, G.; Sethi, T.; Raymond, P.; Domisch, S. Estimating Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations in Streams and Rivers, within a Machine Learning Framework. Sci. Data 2020, 7, 161.

 

Comments 3: Correct.

Response 3: Thank you for your recognition

 

Comments 4: Is this a sentence? State the name of the author.

Response 4: It has been changed (Line 560).

 

Comments 5: comma, space, long dash

Response 5: It has been changed (Line 725).

 

Comments 6: long dash

Response 6: It has been changed (Line 742).

 

Comments 7: comma

Response 7: It has been changed (Line 774).

 

Comments 8: long dash

Response 8: It has been changed (Line 785).

 

Comments 9: long dash

Response 9: It has been changed (Line 787).

 

We appreciate for the Reviewers' warm work and hope that our corrections will meet with approval standard. Once again, we herein send our sincere thanks you’re your comments and suggestions.

 

Best wishes

Xuelian Tan on behalf of coauthors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx