Simulations and Experiments of the Soil Temperature Distribution after 2.45-GHz Short-Time Term Microwave Treatment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript titled: Simulations and Experiments of the Soil Temperature Distribution after 2.45-GHz Short-Time Term Microwave Treatment by Sun et al. presents really interesting scientific work. I have found results very valuable and conclusions provide novelty in selected scientific area of soil disinfection.
There are just few recommentadions:
- remove Figures 6 and 7
- use the same format of Figure descriptions (a, b,c etc.)
- correct figure 21- description
- Figure 2 should be replaced by
- new one with the higher quality
- correlation coefficients should be in the same form (R2)
- correct all numbers (Table 2) for same decimal numbers
- all abbreviations used first time should be explained
- please correct minor typos in english language
Author Response
Article Title: “Simulations and Experiments of the Soil Temperature Distribution after 2.45-GHz Short-Time Term Microwave Treatment”
Dear Reviewers,
On behalf of all the authors, we sincerely appreciate your valuable comments on the manuscript. Your comments not only provided constructive suggestions for improving the quality of the manuscript but also led us to consider our approaches and the design of the system in detail. Our future research will benefit from these comments, as well.
Best regards,
Xiaohe Sun, Chunjiang Zhao.
Reviewer # 1:
Comment # 1: Remove Figures 6 and 7.
Author response: Thank you for the suggestion.We have deleted them.
Comment # 2: Use the same format of Figure descriptions (a, b,c etc.) correct figure 21 description.
Author response: Figure 21 has been correctly described using the same format descriptions (a, b, c, etc.). Now the figure number is 19.
Comment # 3: Figure 2 should be replaced by new one with the higher quality.
Author response: Figure 2 has been replaced by new one with higher resolution.
Comment # 4: Correlation coefficients should be in the same form (R2).
Author response: Table 2 and Table 6 correlation coefficients has been corrected in the same form (R2).
Comment # 5: Correct all numbers (Table 2) for same decimal numbers.
Author response: All numbers in Table 2 have been corrected in same decimal numbers.
Comment # 6: All abbreviations used first time should be explained.
Author response: All abbreviations used first time have been explained including PML in Table 1 and (Re (eps)) and (Im (eps)) in Table 2.
Comment # 7: Please correct minor typos in English language.
Author response: We have corrected some minor typos in the English language,and the manuscript was polished by the language editing company “American Journal Experts (AJE)”.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
I have reviewed the paper titled: “Simulations and Experiments of the Soil Temperature Distribution after 2.45-GHz Short-Time Term Microwave Treatment". In my opinion, the aims of the paper are germane with “Agriculture” journal topic, however, in the present form, the paper fits only in part with the international scientific standards. The paper is written with a low English level. The contribution of this paper to the scientific knowledge is acceptable but some flaws are present. I understand the difficult work done, but as a reviewer it is my duty to highlight the gaps in order to improve the research approach and its presentation to the international scientific community. Please I suggest revising the paper following the suggestions and comments reported in the pdf attached, in order to further improve this interesting paper.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Article Title: “Simulations and Experiments of the Soil Temperature Distribution after 2.45-GHz Short-Time Term Microwave Treatment”
Dear Reviewers,
On behalf of all the authors, we sincerely appreciate your valuable comments on the manuscript. Your comments not only provided constructive suggestions for improving the quality of the manuscript but also led us to consider our approaches and the design of the system in detail. Our future research will benefit from these comments, as well.
Best regards,
Xiaohe Sun, Chunjiang Zhao.
Reviewer # 2:
Comment # 1: (Lines 15)Rather controversial issue, OK that this method does not use chemicals but, along with pathogens, it can also have detrimental effects on the "positive" microbial community, please rephrase...
Author response: Thank you for the suggestion. It was revised (Lines 15-17)
"The electromagnetic field is an important parameter influencing the soil temperature field in the process of microwave soil treatment, and the change of soil temperature directly affects the soil disinfection."
The relevant description of the influence of microwave on "positive" microbial community is added at lines 112-119 of the article, and related literature is cited [9].
Comment # 2: (Line 71-73) This sentence is not well linked with the previous one, please rephrase.
Author response: We have re-edited, "The main manifestation of microwave soil disinfection is reflected in the change of soil temperature [12], the higher temperature after microwave treatment inactivates biological proteins, thereby killing pathogenic soil bacteria, nematodes, and other harmful organisms and grass seeds."
Comment # 3: (Line 50) Please face the issue of possible detrimental effects of such treatments on soil microbial community adding also related reference... it is fundamental issue to be explain to the readers.
Author response: Thank you for the suggestion. These microwave treatments do have adverse effects on soil microbial communities, and we have added an explanation to the reader in lines 76-82.
Comment # 4: (Line 97) I suggest to put the aims more in detail and to link them with.
Author response: The suggestion is very good. We have re-edited pages 87-111 to include more detailed descriptions of the goals and link them to the conclusions. The position of the newly modified part is in lines 112-126.
Comment # 5: Quality of the figure 1 and 8 to be improved
Author response: Figure 1 and 8 have been improved. More detailed description has been added to the Figure 1 and Figure 8 flowcharts, and they are more in line with the standard of the flowchart.
Comment # 6: Result section is excessively long and discussion one too short, I suggest to rephrase all the text of the two sections in a single "results and discussion" section.
Author response: Thank you for your suggestion. We have re-edited the "Results" section and the "Discussion" section into a "Results and Discussion" section. And we made the following adjustments, adjusting the content of lines 593-598 to lines 524-529.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
