Experiment on Cultivation Performance of Plant Fiber-Based Degradable Film in Paddy Field

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

A very interesting paper and approach!

General observation: please, use the same measuring units (eg. MKS etc.), don't use more expressions for same units of the measurement (eg. m, cm, mm).

Lines 76-81, please, indicate the information sources.

Lines 87-92, please be more clearly, if the thickness of 0.328 mm and a width of 70 cm is specific only for ZM, or for all three films.

Line 97, ref. for accumulated temperature.

Line 106-107, please use equation editor, otherwise can be confuse.

Line 108-109, what about position the measurement points of the field (you presented only depth and timing)?

Line 117, please, use equation editor.

Tables 1, 2, 3, please, see the general observation about measurement units.

Please, correlate methodology for economic benefit with table 2.

In conclusions, please, if possible, compare with other results.

Thank you in advance!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

 

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Experiment on cultivation performance of plant fiber-based degradable film in paddy field” (ID: applsci-689454). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Here below is our description on revision according to the reviewers’ comments.

 

Part A (Reviewer 1)

The reviewer’s comment: General observation: please, use the same measuring units (eg. MKS etc.), don't use more expressions for same units of the measurement (eg. m, cm, mm).

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s kind advice. We have made correction according to the reviewer’s comments. The revised details can be found in the revised manuscript.

The reviewer's comment: Lines 76-81, please, indicate the information sources.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. As the reviewer's good advice, the reference has been added to the revised manuscript and the details can be found in Line 81, Page 2.

The reviewer’s comment: Lines 87-92, please be more clearly, if the thickness of 0.328 mm and a width of 70 cm is specific only for ZM, or for all three films.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. The thickness of 0.328 mm and a width of 70 cm is specific only for ZM. We have made correction according to the reviewer’s comments. The revised details can be found in Line 90-92, page 2-3.

The reviewer’s comment: Line 97, ref. for accumulated temperature.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. As the reviewer's good advice, the reference has been added to the revised manuscript and the details can be found in Line 97, Page 3.

The reviewer’s comment: Line 106-107, please use equation editor, otherwise can be confuse.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. We have made correction according to the reviewer’s comments. The revised details can be found in Line 106, page 3.

The reviewer’s comment: Line 108-109, what about position the measurement points of the field (you presented only depth and timing)?

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. The temperature sensors had been installed at the same location on each treatment. The revised details can be found in Line 107-108, page 3.

The reviewer’s comment: Line 117, please, use equation editor.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. We have made correction according to the reviewer’s comments. The revised details can be found in Line 117-118, page 3.

The reviewer’s comment: Tables 1, 2, 3, please, see the general observation about measurement units.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. We have made correction according to the reviewer’s comments. The revised details can be found in Tables 1, 2, 3.

The reviewer’s comment: Please, correlate methodology for economic benefit with table 2.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. We have made correction according to the reviewer’s comments. The revised details can be found in Tables 2.

The reviewer’s comment: In conclusions, please, if possible, compare with other results.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. As the reviewer's good advice, the new sentences and references have been added in Chapter 4 “discussion and conclusion”. The details can be found in Line 236-260, Page 8-9.

 

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes which marked in red in the revised paper will not influence the content and framework of the paper. All the lines and pages indicated above are in the revised manuscript. Thank you and all the reviewers again for the kind advice and hope to learn more from you. We sincerely hope this manuscript will be finally acceptable to be published on Applied Sciences. Thank you very much for all your help and looking forward to hearing from you soon.

Best regards

Sincerely yours

Xianglan Ming

Email: [email protected]

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

 

The work covers new issues related to rice cultivation and the use of new agrotechnical solutions. The thesis is a new source of knowledge in this field and can be published after minor corrections have been included.

 

Metodology part:

 

The methodology at work should be described in detail. Each time, give the method of the experiment, the number of repetitions and refer to the source literature.

 

Specify specifically which statistical analyzes have been done.

 

 

Results part:

 

Definitely all the results obtained in the work should be discussed. Please refer to the literature available in this area and explain the phenomena observed.

It is recommended to add a short chapter to the discussion or to include the discussion in individual parts of the results discussed.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

 

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Experiment on cultivation performance of plant fiber-based degradable film in paddy field” (ID: applsci-689454). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Here below is our description on revision according to the reviewers’ comments.

The reviewer’s comment: Methodology part: The methodology at work should be described in detail. Each time, give the method of the experiment, the number of repetitions and refer to the source literature. Specify specifically which statistical analyzes have been done.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. As the reviewer's good advice, the new sentences and reference have been added to the revised manuscript and the details can be found in Line 105-111, Page 3.

The reviewer's comment: Results part: Definitely all the results obtained in the work should be discussed. Please refer to the literature available in this area and explain the phenomena observed. It is recommended to add a short chapter to the discussion or to include the discussion in individual parts of the results discussed.

The authors’ answer: Thanks for the reviewer’s good evaluation and kind suggestion. As the reviewer's good advice, the discussion has been added to the revised manuscript. The details can be found in Line 236-260, Page 8-9.

 

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes which marked in red in the revised paper will not influence the content and framework of the paper. All the lines and pages indicated above are in the revised manuscript. Thank you and all the reviewers again for the kind advice and hope to learn more from you. We sincerely hope this manuscript will be finally acceptable to be published on Applied Sciences. Thank you very much for all your help and looking forward to hearing from you soon.

Best regards

Sincerely yours

Xianglan Ming

Email: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf