Next Article in Journal
Evaluation and Experiment of Flight Parameter Quality of the Plant Protection UAV Based on Laser Tracker
Next Article in Special Issue
Preparation and Characterization of Novel Magnesium Composite/Walnut Shells-Derived Biochar for As and P Sorption from Aqueous Solutions
Previous Article in Journal
Revisiting Sulphur—The Once Neglected Nutrient: It’s Roles in Plant Growth, Metabolism, Stress Tolerance and Crop Production
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Characterization of Vitamin B12 Compounds in Fermented Poultry Manure Fertilizers

Agriculture 2021, 11(7), 627; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11070627
by Hiromi Katsura 1, Kyohei Koseki 2, Tomohiro Bito 2, Shigeo Takenaka 3 and Fumio Watanabe 2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Agriculture 2021, 11(7), 627; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11070627
Submission received: 16 June 2021 / Revised: 28 June 2021 / Accepted: 2 July 2021 / Published: 5 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue From Waste to Fertilizer in Sustainable Agriculture)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

  The research work presented in article “Characterization of Vitamin B12 Compounds in Commercially Available Organic Fertilizers, Fermented Poultry Manure Products ” brings a wide range of results in the field of bioanalytical chemistry and quantification B12 compounds in heterogenous matrix. Authors tried to study mainly vitamin B12 and its content in fertilizers and fermented manures via bioautography, HPLC, LC-MS. Obtained data were very clearly described. Title of the article is complicated, please try to simplify. . The first part of manuscript (Introduction) brings known and also new information about studied problematic. Additionally I would suggest to add short part about health intolerances and deficiency of B12.

Description of materials and methods is informative bringing details of experimental work. However I fully miss the brief description of studied samples (A, B, C....) The origin and character of samples is required. The part of manuscript (Results and discussion) shows a complex of obtained data equally in graphical forms. Authors used 18 citations for discussion with high context quality. Conclusions are formed very clearly but visionary for plant responsible. Authors did not conduct any bio-issue therefore is very risky to speak about effectivity of studied materials in chain fertilizer-soil system-plant.

There are only some formal comments:

    - description of samples is missing and fully rewuired (please ass table to part 2.1 - Materials and characterize origin of studied samples)

- Fig. 1 is not clear for evaluation (please try to use bioautogram with the higher visual quality).

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

Thank you very much for your decision letter of 22th, June, 2021, with regard to our manuscript (agriculture-1281721) with the comments from yourself. We appreciate the comments, which are very helpful. We have tried to revise the manuscript in line with suggestions.

 

In response to comments from Reviewer 1, the following changes were made (as marked in yellow).

 

  • Title of the article is complicated, please try to simplify.

Ans:

Title of our article has been simplified according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 2-3).

 

  • The first part of manuscript (Introduction) brings known and also new information about studied problematic. Additionally I would suggest to add short part about health intolerances and deficiency of B12.

 

Ans:

Some sentences and references have been added to ”Introduction” according to the reviewer’s suggestion. (lines 29-40)

 

  • Description of materials and methods is informative bringing details of experimental work. However I fully miss the brief description of studied samples (A, B, C....) The origin and character of samples is required.

 

Ans:

Some sentences have been added to “Materials” according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 66-69, and Table 1).

 

  • Conclusions are formed very clearly but visionary for plant responsible. Authors did not conduct any bio-issue therefore is very risky to speak about effectivity of studied materials in chain fertilizer-soil system-plant.

 

Ans:

“ Conclusions” have been revised according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 231-242).

 

5)  - description of samples is missing and fully rewuired (please ass table to part 2.1 - Materials and characterize origin of studied samples)

 

Ans:

Some sentences have been added to “Materials” according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 66-69, and Table 1).

 

6) - Fig. 1 is not clear for evaluation (please try to use bioautogram with the higher visual quality).

 

Ans:

        High quality version of Fig. 1 has been given according to the reviewer’s suggestion.

Reviewer 2 Report

This study conducted a microbiological assay to determine the vitamin B12 content of various commercially available fermented poultry manure fertilizer products. The results varied from 1.4 μg to approximately 20 μg per 100 g of dry weight. In the bioautography analysis, selected products had two positive spots with identical Rf values of vitamin B12 and pseudovitamin B12. High-performance liquid chromatography and liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization−mass spectrometry analyses of the selected products indicated that these fertilizers primarily contained vitamin B12. They also contained minor inactive cobamides such as pseudovitamin B12, 2-methyladenyl cobamide, and 2-methylmercaptoadenyl cobamide. (4) Conclusions: These results suggested that edible plants would enrich vitamin B12 using fermented poultry manure organic fertilizer products.

 

  1. “The B12 contents of the fermented poultry manure fertilizers tested in the present study were lower than those of these organic wastes.”. The authors should explain this result.
  2. “However, the fertilizer C product showed a single major peak with a retention time of 10.2 min, which was the identical retention time of B12.”. The authors should explain this result.
  3. 2 is not very clear. Please improve resolution of the Fig.
  4. In Introduction section. The end of the first paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph were not logical and need to be revised.
  5. “These inactive cobamides would be synthesized by poultry intestinal bacteria and/or formed during the fermentation process of the manure by concomitant bacteria.”. One reference is needed.
  6. The conclusion was too short, please summarize relevant important results.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2:

Thank you very much for your decision letter of 22th, June, 2021, with regard to our manuscript (agriculture-1281721) with the comments from yourself. We appreciate the comments, which are very helpful. We have tried to revise the manuscript in line with suggestions.

 

In response to comments from Reviewer 2, the following changes were made (as marked in yellow).

1)“The B12 contents of the fermented poultry manure fertilizers tested in the present study were lower than those of these organic wastes.”. The authors should explain this result.

 

Ans:

        Some sentences have been added to “Results and Discussion” according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 147-152).

 

 

2)“However, the fertilizer C product showed a single major peak with a retention time of 10.2 min, which was the identical retention time of B12.”. The authors should explain this result.

 

Ans:

       Some sentences have been added to “Results and Discussion” according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 213-215).

 

  • 2 is not very clear. Please improve resolution of the Fig.

 

Ans:

High quality version of Fig. 1 has been given according to the reviewer’s suggestion.

 

  • In Introduction section. The end of the first paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph were not logical and need to be revised.

 

Ans:

       ” Introduction” has been revised according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 29-40).

 

  • “These inactive cobamides would be synthesized by poultry intestinal bacteria and/or formed during the fermentation process of the manure by concomitant bacteria.”. One reference is needed.

 

Ans:

       A new reference has been added to “Results and Discussion” according to the reviewer’s suggestion (line 213, reference No. 19).

 

  • The conclusion was too short, please summarize relevant important results.

 

Ans:

      “Conclusions” have been revised according to the reviewer’s suggestion (lines 231-242).

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Based on the author's revision, this article can be accepted. 

Back to TopTop