Monosporic Inoculation of Economically Important Horticultural Species with Native Endomycorrhizae under Greenhouse Conditions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors
The manuscript topic meets the Journal aims.
About the quality of written English, the manuscript needs only few language corrections to improve its English readability.
The relevant aspects of the topic are not always presented fully, minor revisions and use of other scientific literature could be considered.
Abstract.
Line 16 ‘zigzag sampling pattern’ could you please add the reference of this method?
Line 24 ‘while the T6’ the reader does not know the T6 significance, please describe it.
Introduction
line 34 The authors could also consider the following paper:
Caruso, C., Maucieri, C., Berruti, A., Borin, M., & Barbera, A. C. (2018). Responses of Different Panicum miliaceum L. Genotypes to Saline and Water Stress in a Marginal Mediterranean Environment. Agronomy, 8(1), 8.
Lines 37-40 do you have any reference about your statement?
Line 45 ?salt stress? Could you add “in cucumber” ?
Line 55 ‘ environmental conditions, soil type, and’ ; “.....type, agro-ecosystem agronomic management, and ..........”
Line 56 ‘.. for optimizing their role as biofertiliser.’ Please could you sustain this sentence with references as:
Säle, V., Aguilera, P., Laczko, E., Mäder, P., Berner, A., Zihlmann, U., ... & Oehl, F. (2015). Impact of conservation tillage and organic farming on the diversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 84, 38-52.
Lumini, E., Orgiazzi, A., Borriello, R., Bonfante, P., & Bianciotto, V. (2010). Disclosing arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal biodiversity in soil through a land‐use gradient using a pyrosequencing approach. Environmental microbiology, 12(8), 2165-2179.
Caruso, C., Maucieri, C., Barco, A., Barbera, A. C., & Borin, M. (2018). Effects of mycorrhizal inoculation and digestate fertilisation on triticale biomass production using fungicide-coated seeds. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research, 57(1), 42-51.
Line 61 material and methods
The author can introduce the phenological development stages of studied plants in the crop managment?
About das (days after sowing) and dat (days after transplanting) could the author could use only one in all manuscript?
Line 86 please check from this note on, the correspondence with the references number 18 is missing and the references numbering seems wrong.
Line 91 ‘sterilized for 30 minutes at 15 pounds of pressure’ could you checked if pound is correct? See the International System of Units.
Results
Lines 132-133 ‘The physicochemical characteristics …..the host species [25, 26].’ Please move this sentence in the discussion section
Line 136 ‘Table 1 Analysis of soil from three locations in Coahuila.’ which classification system was used to classify the soil texture?
Line 137 ‘3.2. Spore Morphology’ could you please verify the correspondence of the data presented in the test with the ones of table 2? For example spore equatorial diameter (ED) ranges from 93.1 (11.50 of sample 9 Zatagoza) and ‘(TSW) from 3.09 to 13.84 μm.’ 13,90 of n°13 Parras.
Line 145 ‘3.3. Number of AMF Spores’ . I don’t have understood your result, concerning table 3 you have the same letter for instance ‘a’ in different crop and treatment, so you cannot say that for instance T1 ‘highest, significant density of spores’ when T2 has ‘25.33 bdac.’
Please double check your result and statistic.
In the conclusion include more general statement of your research results.
Reference please double check your list and its correspondence in the text. Number 7 the authors names seem incorrect.
Regards
Author Response
According to the corrections marked by te reviewer 1, references were included in introduction, changes were made in material and methods, results, discussion and conclusions
In line 4, in relation to the authors, the name of the correspondence author was changed:Rosalinda M. Villarreal
Line 16 zigzag sampling pattern’ could you please add the reference of this method?
The added
Response 1 The added reference of the method corresponds to the number 1
1. Soil Sampling Instructions for the Farm. Virginia State University. Available online: https://www.soiltest.vt.edu/content/dam/soiltest_vt_edu/PDF/farm-sampling.pdf ( accessed on 1 February 2019).
Line 24 ‘while the T6’ the reader does not know the T6 significance, please describe it.
Response2: It was described:
(Saltillo spore + Steiner modified with 20% of the normal phosphorus concentration)
Introduction
line 34 The authors could also consider the following paper:
Caruso, C., Maucieri, C., Berruti, A., Borin, M., & Barbera, A. C. (2018). Responses of Different Panicum miliaceum L. Genotypes to Saline and Water Stress in a Marginal Mediterranean Environment. Agronomy, 8(1), 8.
Response 3.
I appreciate the suggestion of the article, but the article we propose does not include salt stress, only the effect of endomycorrhizas in horticultural crops.
Lines 37-40 do you have any reference about your statement?
Response 4.
Apoinment 7 was added: Baum W C; Tohamy N. G. Increasing the productivity and product quality of vegetable crops using arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Scient Hort. (review; 2015;131-141). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.03.002
Line 45 ?salt stress? Could you add “in cucumber” ?
Response 5
Was added: In cucumber
Line 55 ‘ environmental conditions, soil type, and’ ; “.....type, agro-ecosystem agronomic management, and ......
Response 6: the text was changed for
Understanding the diversity and structure of the MFA with respect to the host, the environmental conditions, the type of soil and the level of alteration of the site is of atmost importance to optimize its role as a biofertilizer,
Line 56 ‘.. for optimizing their role as biofertiliser.’ Please could you sustain this sentence with references as:
Response 7. of the three proposed appointments, was include two. Lumini..... and Caruso.....
Line 61 material and methods
The author can introduce the phenological development stages of studied plants in the crop managment?
About das (days after sowing) and dat (days after transplanting) could the author could use only one in all manuscript?
Response 8.
The cucumber, melon and tomato were in flowering except onion that was in the vegetative phase start of bulb formation, was added in line 109 y 110. Only mentioned in this part of text and was removed from the tables.
Line 86 please check from this note on, the correspondence with the references number 18 is missing and the references numbering seems wrong.
Response 9
Currently corresponds to line 88.indeed the appointment was not found, but adding two appointments and is now number 20.
Line 91 ‘sterilized for 30 minutes at 15 pounds of pressure’ could you checked if pound is correct? See the International System of Units.
Response 10.
Line 91
Currently corresponds to line 90. was corriged the units: lb in-2
Results
Lines 132-133‘The physicochemical characteristics …..the host species [25, 26].’ Please move this sentence in the discussion section
Response 11
They moved to the discussion text in lines 212, 213
Line 136 ‘Table 1 Analysis of soil from three locations in Coahuila.’ which classification system was used to classify the soil texture?
Response 12
The texture classification method was written in material and methods in line 68 (Bouyoucus, appointment 17). Therefore, it was not mentioned in Table 1.
Line 137 ‘3.2. Spore Morphology’ could you please verify the correspondence of the data presented in the test with the ones of table 2? For example spore equatorial diameter (ED) ranges from 93.1 (11.50 of sample 9 Zatagoza) and ‘(TSW) from 3.09 to 13.84 μm.’ 13,90 of n°13 Parras.
Response 13
The wrong was corrected in Table 2 of treatment 9 of Zaragoza, and correspond at ED=111.50
Line 145 ‘3.3. Number of AMF Spores’ . I don’t have understood your result, concerning table 3 you have the same letter for instance ‘a’ in different crop and treatment, so you cannot say that for instance T1 ‘highest, significant density of spores’ when T2 has ‘25.33 bdac.’
Response 14
The text of Table 3 was changed and only the best treatment was written in each horticultural crop
Please double check your result and statistic.
Response 15. We review the results again
In the conclusion include more general statement of your research results.
Response 16
The conclusions in the horticultural crops was complemented in line 284-285
Reference please double check your list and its correspondence in the text. Number 7 the authors names seem incorrect.
The reference 7 was deleted and 4 were added in the discussion, with a total of 46 references.
Thank you
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript is easy to read and results are interesting.
However, I have a major concern with respect to the fact that they have transplanted the several species at the same time, without looking at their phenological traits at that moment (probably the several species were not at the same stage of development). I wonder whether this point could be discussed.
Author Response
However, I have a major concern with respect to the fact that they have transplanted the several species at the same time, without looking at their phenological traits at that moment (probably the several species were not at the same stage of development). I wonder whether this point could be discussed.
Response
Another reviewer requested to specify the phenological stage of each horticultural crop and that was added in materials and methods in 2.5 Crop Management line 109-110
However, the objetive of study was to verify the colonization of native endomycorrhizas and their effect on horticultural crops.
Reviewer 3 Report
Manuscript is important for future research. Authors have well written but include the figures (Root colonization and plant growth activities) in the manuscript. So, easily readable and understandable. Also, include some more recent references in discussion sections.
Author Response
Manuscript is important for future research. Authors have well written but include the figures (Root colonization and plant growth activities) in the manuscript. So, easily readable and understandable. Also, include some more recent references in discussion sections.
Respuesta
The text of tables was modified, other references of 2017 and 2018 were included.
I hope you find improvements in the article when you review the second version.
Thanks for the review of the article
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
