Research on the Interdependence Linkages between Soil Tillage Systems and Climate Factors on Maize Crop

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have reviewed the manuscript entitled „Research on the Interdependence Linkages between Soil Tillage Systems and Climate Factors on Maize Crop”.

Authors in their study evaluated the influence of four soil tillage systems (conventional-plow, minimum tillage-chisel, minimum tillage-disc and no-tillage) and two moderate doses of fertilizers on maize yield, in the pedoclimatic conditions of the Agricultural Research and Development Station Turda (ARDS Turda), located in Transylvanian Plain in Romania.

In my opinion the current version of Your manuscript is suitable for publication in Land, but after same revisions.

The article suffers from a number of small mistakes, ranging from misspellings to incorrectly phrased sentences.

Some adjustments are suggested to qualify the paper:

Issues include:

1.    The Abstract should not exceed 200 words. In actual version the Abstract content 223 words. I propose to shorten it.

2.    General comment to the Introduction section: The content of the literature review chapter is related to the research topic. Up-to-date literature references are presented in the manuscript by the author(s). But I suppose that Authors should add same information connected to average yield of maize in Romania. Those information should be add in the first sentences of the Introduction .

3.    In the chapter "Materials and Methods", the methodology is adequate. Why Authors chosen such as doses of fertilizers of maize: 56-56-56? What’s the nutrition demand and  doses of fertilization of maize in Your country?

4.    In the chapter "Results", the results are displayed correctly.

5.    Statistical analysis - could do with little more description – what were the variables and factors, was this done as an Analysis of Variance? What statistical package was used?

6.    The “Discussion” is informative. Moreover, the Authors attempt to discuss their important results and the rest is a quotation of literature.

7.    The conclusions are not enough supported by the results. Moreover it have content same practical information for advisers, farmers. In my opinion it must be proved.

8.    Another recommendation there are in the text of manuscript. I hope that these comments help you to make an improved the final version of the manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Answer for reviewer 1

I have reviewed the manuscript entitled „Research on the Interdependence Linkages between Soil Tillage Systems and Climate Factors on Maize Crop”. Authors in their study evaluated the influence of four soil tillage systems (conventional-plow, minimum tillage-chisel, minimum tillage-disc and no-tillage) and two moderate doses of fertilizers on maize yield, in the pedoclimatic conditions of the Agricultural Research and Development Station Turda (ARDS Turda), located in Transylvanian Plain in Romania. In my opinion the current version of Your manuscript is suitable for publication in Land, but after same revisions. The article suffers from a number of small mistakes, ranging from misspellings to incorrectly phrased sentences. Some adjustments are suggested to qualify the paper:

Answer: Dear reviewer, thank you very much for reviewing our paper and for the recommendations made. These were really useful and helped us to improve the paper. Thanks!

Question: The Abstract should not exceed 200 words. In actual version the Abstract content 223 words. I propose to shorten it.

Answer: Thanks. The abstract has been shortened to fit within a maximum of 200 words.

Question: General comment to the Introduction section: The content of the literature review chapter is related to the research topic. Up-to-date literature references are presented in the manuscript by the author(s). But I suppose that Authors should add same information connected to average yield of maize in Romania. Those information should be add in the first sentences of the Introduction.

Answer:  We added the information regarding the average yield: *in the last 10 years (2011-2021), the average maize production in Romania was between 3,462 kg ha^-1 (2015) and 7,644 kg ha^-1 (2018).*

Question: In the chapter "Materials and Methods", the methodology is adequate. Why Authors chosen such as doses of fertilizers of maize: 56-56-56? What’s the nutrition demand and doses of fertilization of maize in Your country?

Answer:  The chosen fertilization doses were selected according to the average doses applied in Romania for the maize crop. However, the maximum dose allowed is 170 kg ha^-1 of nitrogen. But the EU foresees a 20% reduction of this maximum allowed dose in the near future.

Question: In the chapter "Results", the results are displayed correctly.

Answer:  Thank you very much.

Question: Statistical analysis - could do with little more description – what were the variables and factors, was this done as an Analysis of Variance? What statistical package was used?

Answer:  We have included a new chapter - 2.4. Methods of analysis and processing of experimental data. In this chapter we describe in detail the method of statistical processing of experimental data.

Question: The “Discussion” is informative. Moreover, the Authors attempt to discuss their important results and the rest is a quotation of literature.

Answer:  Thank you very much.

Question: The conclusions are not enough supported by the results. Moreover it have content same practical information for advisers, farmers. In my opinion it must be proved.

Answer:  We have included a new synthesis of the results at the beginning of the conclusions, followed by recommendations for agricultural practice, respectively farmers; we also specified the importance of pedo-climatic conditions in choosing the optimal agrotechnical solution.

Question: Another recommendation there are in the text of manuscript. I hope that these comments help you to make an improved the final version of the manuscript.

Answer:  Thank you very much for reviewing our paper and for the recommendations made.

Reviewer 2 Report

In annex

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Answer for reviewer 2

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for reviewing our paper and for the recommendations made. These were really useful and helped us to improve the paper. Thanks!

Question: The experiment included three factors depending on the farmer: Biological material, Soil tillage system, Fertilization system. Climatic conditions is a factor independent of the farmer.

Answer: Yes, that is very good you noticed; the hypothesis of the research was to try to establish the ways in which the farmer can minimize the effects (risk) of climatic consequences, through the soil tillage system he can choose.

Question: There is no information in chapter 2.2 on whether maize was grown for grain or silage.

Answer: These 2 maize hybrids are suitable for grains, we added this aspect in chapter 2.2.

Question: Line 162 lists the sowing dates. Please also provide the dates of the collection.

Answer: The experience collection date was added.

Question: No chapter 2.4 Statistical analysis. In line 170 he writes only: Experimental data were processed by statistical variant analysis wit Anova PoliFact Soft [51] and establishing the limit differences for p-values 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001. Lack of information on the methods used (data verification, type of distribution, type of difference significance test).

Answer: It was included chap. 2.4. Methods of analysis and processing experimental data - where we presented in detail the procedure for processing experimental data, so as to ensure the reproducibility of the experiment.

Question: Line 184. The soil tillage system, herbicide use and crop rotation have the greatest influence on crop weed infestation.

Answer: Thanks, this has been highlighted.

Question: Lines 219-220. Please provide the optimal rainfall for maize cultivation in the Transylvanian Plain instead of the Romanian average range.

Answer: Thanks for the idea, we changed the text to include - optimal rainfall for maize cultivation in the Transylvanian Plain instead of the Romanian average range.

Question: Lines 228-229. Average temperatures lower than the multi-year period - April 2017, April 2021, May 2016, May 2019, May 2020, May 2021. The hottest months: May 2018 - 3.7; June 2019 - 3.8; Jul 2021 - 2.9; VIII - 2.8; September 2020 - 2.6. The dry year is 2018 - the temperature is 2.5 times higher than the average. There is no information whether the temperature did not drop below 4 C at night.

Answer: We completed the information, namely the fact that throughout this research period the temperature did not drop below 4 degrees.

Question: Lines 237-240. The monthly rainfall distribution is also important. Please describe in the same way as the temperature - the driest and wettest months. Actual rainfall is not compared to that which is optimal for maize cultivation.

Answer: This information was added: *Precipitation during the research period shows that the precipitation is lower than the multi-year period (table 2): April 2018, April 2021, May 2020, June 2017, June 2021, July 2019, August 2017, August 2018, September 2016, September 2018, September 2019. The rainiest months are: April 2016, April 2017, April 2019, May 2016, May 2019, June 2016, June 2020, July 2016, July 2017, July 2021, and August 2016. In 66.6% of the research period, the recorded precipitation was optimal for the maize crop.*

Question: Lines 270-278. Many different factors influence the grain yield. The relationship only to precipitation in June is statistically insignificant.

Answer: We have corrected, and mentioned that precipitation during this period can be one of the factors influencing grain yield.

Question: Figure 2 presents erroneous data - the comparison of tables 2 and 5 shows a different relationship. Table 5. The highest yield was found in 2020, despite the longest period of emergence and hailstorms. The lowest yields were found in 2016. The highest rainfall was recorded in June 2016 and 2020.

 Answer: Figure 2 shows a correlation between the amount of precipitation in June and the average production each year (according to the literature, this precipitation is very important, then the cobs begin to form, if there is not enough precipitation, the cobs will be small). Tables 2 and 5 refer to the total amount of precipitation (from the vegetation period). There are no erroneous data. The precipitation in figure 2 is that of June (see month VI in table 2) and the production in figure 2 is the average production of the 6 years presented in the table.

Question: Lines 317-319. Which means LSD. There is no description of the results of the statistical analysis in the text.

Answer: The significance of the statistical analysis, separated by LSD by ANOVA, was included in the text.

Question: There is no multivariate statistical analysis for the results from Tables 6-8.

Answer: The statistical processing was carried out in the ANOVA multivariate statistical analysis program, but in the paper the influence of each factor was presented separately, in order to highlight the influence of each factor and to avoid a too large table.

Question: Line 362-365. The article did not examine soil moisture. The influence of rainfall in June and July on the yield was not proven. Chapter conclusions too short. No summary of the obtained results. No guidance for farmers.

Answer: Soil moisture will be presented in another paper regarding the influence on the soil. In this paper, we statistically processed the amount of precipitation recorded in relation to maize production. We have included in the conclusions chapter the synthesis of the results and recommendations for farmers.

Reviewer 3 Report

Overall, this was an interesting manuscript. I only have a few minor suggestions/comments. Please see below.

 

Abstract:

None

Introduction:

Line 56: I don’t understand what you mean by “causes suffocation of rising”

Line 62: I think the sentence should end with the word “preparation”

Line 74: Please move the word “soil” before “moisture conservation”

Materials and Methods:

Line 97: Please change “E-V” to “E-W”

Line 98: Please add the word “which” before “causes a temporary excess …”

Results and Discussion:

Due to the reduction in yield and delay in germination caused by the MTD and NT treatments: could planting be slightly delayed? The more intense cultivation is probably allowing the soils to warm, which speeds up the germination of the maize and ultimately increases yield.

 

Line 187: Please rewrite as the following “The reduction of using maize herbicides has greatly diminished the importance of this crop in controlling the weeding of agricultural holdings [31,54].”

 

Lines 191-224: This paragraph would probably be better suited for the M&M section instead of the results section.

 

Table 1 and 2: Can you add the standard deviation or standard error to the 65-year averages? Also, these tables might look better as line charts. Table 2 could also be displayed as a stacked bar chart.

 

Line 279: please remove the word “dis”

 

Conclusion:

None

Author Response

Answer for reviewer 3

Overall, this was an interesting manuscript. I only have a few minor suggestions/comments. Please see below.

Answer: Dear reviewer, thank you very much for reviewing our paper and for the recommendations made. These were really useful and helped us to improve the paper. Thanks!

Question: Line 56: I don’t understand what you mean by “causes suffocation of rising”

Answer: We wanted to specify that - it prevents the development of weeds. We corrected the text.

Question: Line 62: I think the sentence should end with the word “preparation”.

Answer: Thanks. We corrected it.

Question: Line 74: Please move the word “soil” before “moisture conservation”.

Answer: We corrected it.

Question: Line 97: Please change “E-V” to “E-W”

Answer: We corrected it.

Question: Line 98: Please add the word “which” before “causes a temporary excess …”

Answer: We corrected it.

Question: Due to the reduction in yield and delay in germination caused by the MTD and NT treatments: could planting be slightly delayed? The more intense cultivation is probably allowing the soils to warm, which speeds up the germination of the maize and ultimately increases yield.

Answer: Yes, thank you, very well noted as a recommendation. We have included in the chapter conclusions to the recommendation.

Question: Line 187: Please rewrite as the following “The reduction of using maize herbicides has greatly diminished the importance of this crop in controlling the weeding of agricultural holdings [31,54].”

Answer: We corrected it.

Question: Lines 191-224: This paragraph would probably be better suited for the M&M section instead of the results section.

Answer: We included it in the results because we discussed them in relation to the experimental factors, the hybrid and the climatic conditions.

Question: Table 1 and 2: Can you add the standard deviation or standard error to the 65-year averages? Also, these tables might look better as line charts. Table 2 could also be displayed as a stacked bar chart.

Answer: We do not have the standard deviation or standard error available for the average years; we wanted to keep the construction of tables because we consider that it is easier to see the positive or negative deviations of temperatures, respectively precipitation.

Question: Line 279: please remove the word “dis”

Answer: Thanks. We corrected it.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper has been revised according to the reviewier's comments.