Response of Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum) to Deficit Irrigation Management under the Semi-Arid Environment of Egypt: Field and Modeling Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The introduction must be improved, specify that the new irrigation systems and schedules permit to save water with a result a good production and high quality.

All figures and tabs must be enhanced and standardized at the journal guidelines.

In the figure 1 is necessary add another y axis for RH, to appreciate the variations of temperature.

The methodologies to obtain the soil properties are not reported. Table 1 must be modified to make it easier to read.

Soil chemical properties describe in table 1 show a organic matter value very high (Carbon = 2.44????). Verify and also the other values pH and EC. 

It’s not necessary describe the Penman Monteith equation but its sufficient the reference.

Line 170 Include instruments to determine Leaf Area Index and and acronym.

Line 171 Add the Acronym of harvest index

Table 2 please all data together. Normally the calculation of PS% is describes

Grain yield showed in table 2 are many interesting, in particular the result of T3. It would be interesting to determine the statistically data in the productions and calculate the water use efficiency (WUE).

Line 219 the percentage don't corresponding with treatment T7 (table 2).

Table 3 HI isn’t a growing degree day.

The simulation effect of water saving in the figure 2 should be changed with a table or in a clear way.

In this study to suggest at Egyptian farmers a right irrigation management, the authors should be a statistical analysis of the results.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Reviewer 1: The introduction must be improved, specify that the new irrigation systems and schedules permit to save water with a result a good production and high quality.

Authors’ Response: Thank you for your note. We carefully improved the “introduction” section and added three paragraphs, highlighting them with yellow color, so we hope to address this comment satisfactorily.

Reviewer 1: All figures and tabs must be enhanced and standardized at the journal guidelines.

Authors’ Response: Thanks for your note. We improved the figures and tables following the instruction of the Agriculture journal.

Reviewer 1: In the figure 1 is necessary add another y axis for RH, to appreciate the variations of temperature.

Authors’ Response: Thanks for your note. We added the y axis for RH.

Reviewer 1: The methodologies to obtain the soil properties are not reported. Table 1 must be modified to make it easier to read.

Authors’ Response: Thanks for your note. The procedures followed to get the soil analysis properties are common, and we followed the international standard practices. Please, note that the soil properties are not studied factors in this research. Therefore, we ask you to understand that there is no need to write these methods to concentrate more on the study’s primary aim and saving space in the manuscript.

Reviewer 1: Soil chemical properties describe in table 1 show a organic matter value very high (Carbon = 2.44????). Verify and also the other values pH and EC.

Authors’ Response: Thanks for your note. Wit looks shifting some values. We divided Table 1 into 4 tables for clarity. We checked the value of OM it is 0.12, 0.24, and 0.26% in soil depth at 0-15 cm, 15-30 cm, and 30-45 cm depth. The new values are coincided with the type of soil sandy loam, which poor in nutrients. Besides, percent of organic C  below 1.5 is considered “Low” in “Rating of nutrient availability in soils” based on classic books on soil analyses. The EC is correct as the soil of the experiment is saline with 3.86, 4.89, and 5.37 dS/m in different soil depths. pH values are correct as well.

Reviewer 1: It’s not necessary describe the Penman Monteith equation but its sufficient the reference.

Authors’ Response: We considered your note and deleted the Penman Monteith equation and its description.

Reviewer 1: Line 170 Include instruments to determine Leaf Area Index and and acronym.

Authors’ Response: Thank you for your note. We added the name of the instrument used to measure leaf area.

Reviewer 1: Line 171 Add the Acronym of harvest index

Authors’ Response: We addressed your note and added the acronym of harvest index (HI).

Reviewer 1: Table 2 please all data together. Normally the calculation of PS% is describes Grain yield showed in table 2 are many interesting, in particular the result of T3. It would be interesting to determine the statistically data in the productions and calculate the water use efficiency (WUE).

Authors’ Response: We addressed your note, calculated WUE, and presented the statistically analyzed data in Table 2.

Reviewer 1: Line 219 the percentage don’t corresponding with treatment T7 (table 2).

Authors’ Response: Thank you for your note. We corrected these sentences.

Reviewer 1. Table 3 HI isn’t a growing degree day.

Authors’ Response: It is a harvest index (HI).

Reviewer 1: The simulation effect of water saving in the figure 2 should be changed with a table or in a clear way.

Authors’ Response: We considered your note and we replaced Figure 2 with Table 9.

Reviewer 1: In this study to suggest at Egyptian farmers a right irrigation management, the authors should be a statistical analysis of the results.

Authors’ Response: We addressed your note, and we subjected all obtained data to the analysis of variance for a randomized complete block design. Statistically significant differences between means were compared at p ≤ 0.05 using Tukey’s HSD (honestly significant difference) test.

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting research work on the application of CropSyst system conducted in Egypt. This work showcases the effectiveness of data driven modelling and different deficit irrigation treatments. Well presented and documented results.

Two aspects of this paper require some improvements,

1) A clear comparison between simulated and modelling based results against the ground truth / actual results based on physical experiments. If further physical experiment is not possible, then at least a discussion on this comparison which is essential to justify the effectiveness of the technique.

2) This manuscript is suitable for the Special Issue on the Effects of Climate Change. However there is a need to include a newly written "discussion" section to highlights the true connection between this research outcomes and how that can help to mitigate the effects of climate change in coming years, especially in the context of Egypt.

Author Response

Reviewer 2: This is an interesting research work on the application of CropSyst system conducted in Egypt. This work show cases the effectiveness of data driven modelling and different deficit irrigation treatments. Well presented and documented results.

Authors’ Response: Thank you for the positive general opinion on the manuscript and detailed comments mentioned below. We carefully reviewed the manuscript, and we hope that we satisfactorily referred to your comments.

Reviewer 2. Two aspects of this paper require some improvements:

1) A clear comparison between simulated and modelling based results against the ground truth/ actual results based on physical experiments. If further physical experiment is not possible, then at least a discussion on this comparison which is essential to justify the effectiveness of the technique.

Authors’ Response: We considered your note and revised the manuscript based on your comment. We hope that we satisfactorily referred your comments.

2) This manuscript is suitable for the Special Issue on the Effects of Climate Change. However there is a need to include a newly written “discussion” section to highlights the true connection between this research outcomes and how that can help to mitigate the effects of climate change in coming years, especially in the context of Egypt.

Authors’ Response: We addressed your note. We included a newly written “discussion” section and “conclusion” to highlight the real connection between this research outcome and how that can help to mitigate the effects of climate change in coming years, especially in the context of Egypt. We hope that we satisfactorily referred your comment.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have been to a good job to manuscript review.

Only three advices:

Line 65: the word agriculture has many eeee;

Figure 1: it would be better to keep the temperature values separate;

Soil properties: I didn't want that the authors describe the analysis but that it was added the reference.