Relationship between Maize Seed Productivity in Mexico between 1983 and 2018 with the Adoption of Genetically Modified Maize and the Resilience of Local Races

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I can confirm that the subject matter of this study (Relationship between Maize Seed Productivity in Mexico between 1983 and 2018 with the Adoption of Genetically Modified Maize and the Resilience of Local Races) is of interest and relevance in Agriculture.

Comments to the Authors:

• The authors did not present any hypothesis at the beginning
• add reference to statistical analysis
• correct Conclusion - but the conclusion should not be a summary. Add a practical implications statement. In my opinion this section may be improved reducing data and giving few key message/take home message to the readers. An idea may be to synthetize in 3-5 bullet the key results of the study, evidences and recommendation. This improvement will increase clearness and readability. Add a practical implications statement.
• other minor comments were marked in the text of manuscript

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1

The Authors reply to:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I can confirm that the subject matter of this study (Relationship between Maize Seed Productivity in Mexico between 1983 and 2018 with the Adoption of Genetically Modified Maize and the Resilience of Local Races) is of interest and relevance in Agriculture.

Comments to the Authors:

The authors did not present any hypothesis at the beginning

Authors reply: The starting hypothesis is that the low productivity of grain corn in Mexico is associated with the water production regime, which in turn is a factor that influences the decision of the producer at the time of selecting the variety to be cultivated, and therefore influences the adoption of transgenic varieties. We include this precision in the text.

 

Add reference to statistical analysis

Authors reply: We welcome the suggestion, but the ANOVA test is a well-known and widely used statistical tool in agricultural sciences, so we do not consider it necessary to add a bibliographic reference.

 

Correct Conclusion - but the conclusion should not be a summary. Add a practical implications statement. In my opinion this section may be improved reducing data and giving few key message/take home message to the readers. An idea may be to synthetize in 3-5 bullet the key results of the study, evidences and recommendation. This improvement will increase clearness and readability. Add a practical implications statement.

Authors reply: Thanks for the suggestion.  We added the text “And strengthening the hydro-agricultural infrastructure in rainfed areas” We include this precision in the text.

 

Other minor comments were marked in the text of manuscript

Authors reply: For the paragraphs that start with a bibliographic reference, it was included before the reference, the name of the first author. We include this precision in the text.

 

Best regards

The Authors

 

Reviewer 2 Report

in rows 42-44, the statistical data could be updated in 2019.

The authors aimed to identify the causes of too low corn production in Mexico and the possibilities for its growth. The topic is relevant and interesting for this region.
The subject is interesting. A study was conducted for a period of 35 years in the recent history of Mexico. New elements are brought compared to what was known.
The paper is well written and easy to understand.
The conclusions largely answer the question asked for this subject, being argued in the paper.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2

The Authors reply to:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In rows 42-44, the statistical data could be updated in 2019.

Authors reply: We appreciate the suggestion; however, the analysis period of the study was selected in such way that it would coincide with full government periods, which last six year each, and the last ended in 2018.

The authors aimed to identify the causes of too low corn production in Mexico and the possibilities for its growth. The topic is relevant and interesting for this region.
The subject is interesting. A study was conducted for a period of 35 years in the recent history of Mexico. New elements are brought compared to what was known.
The paper is well written and easy to understand.
The conclusions largely answer the question asked for this subject, being argued in the paper.

 

Best regards

The Authors

 

Reviewer 3 Report

In this article authors studied the maize productivity in Mexico and  determined the influence of agricultural policies in the sector.

The manuscript is well written and the theme of the study is presented appropriately in the introduction section. I just have some of the following minor comments:

Materials and methods: in ANOVA analysis did author’s test for normality and homogeneity of variances? Which statistics tests did author’s used whit that purpose?

Author’s should use the name of the Reference or a capital letter at the beginning of the sentence.

Line 166 to 173: There is a duplication of the previous paragraph.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3

The Authors reply to:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this article authors studied the maize productivity in Mexico and  determined the influence of agricultural policies in the sector. The manuscript is well written and the theme of the study is presented appropriately in the introduction section. I just have some of the following minor comments:

Materials and methods: in ANOVA analysis did author’s test for normality and homogeneity of variances? Which statistics tests did author’s used whit that purpose?

Authors reply: We acknowledge the suggestion, however in this study we did not develop tests of normality or variance homogeneity due to that the annual values of production (t), field yield (t ha^-1 ) and cultivated area, both at the national level o by state, they are the average of at less 30 observation. Therefore, based on the Central Limit Theorem, the assumptions of parametric statistics were assumed.

Author’s should use the name of the Reference or a capital letter at the beginning of the sentence.

Authors reply: For the paragraphs that start with a bibliographic reference, it was included before the reference, the name of the first author. We include this precision in the text.

Line 166 to 173: There is a duplication of the previous paragraph.

Authors reply: We acknowledge the observation. The duplicate text was eliminated. We include this precision in the text.

Best regards

The Authors