Effects of Different Long-Term Fertilizer Management Systems on Soil Microbial Biomass Turnover in a Double-Cropping Rice Field in Southern China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is recommended for publication after the following revisions:

Abstract:

-Lines 1-6: This part should be summarized by explaining your main motivation for conducting this study.

-Lines 9-12: Your materials and methods repeated these sentences, so they should be summarized.

Introduction:

-How would you describe the main problems? Provide literature about the negative and positive impacts of different fertilizers on soil microbial populations.

Materials and Methods:

-Sites and cropping system: Over the study period, was the testing location consistent?

-Experimental design: Have you considered the distance between different plots? Give an explanation.

-2.4.3. Flux turnover rate of SMBC and SMBN: Use the Word equation system to present the formula.

-Yield of early rice and later rice: Is there a particular reason why you chose this moisture content?

Discussion:

-There should be improvements to the discussion section. In the discussion section, you should discuss the meaning, significance, and relevance of your results. It should explain and evaluate your findings, relate them to your literature review, and support your overall conclusion. An additional results section is not necessary.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

< Agronomy >

< Agronomy- 1934449>

 

Dear Editor,

Thank you very much for your useful comments and suggestions on our manuscript. Please convey our gratitude to the editorial and reviewers who have made useful and detailed suggestions for improvement of the manuscript. As their suggestions we have revised the language and the content with red color in the manuscript. The details of the changes in this manuscript were listed belowing in point form:

 

Reviewer 1

Abstract:

-Lines 1-6: This part should be summarized by explaining your main motivation for conducting this study.

√ In Lines 1-6: This part were summarized and revised, according to reviewer suggestion.

-Lines 9-12: Your materials and methods repeated these sentences, so they should be summarized.

√ In Lines 9-12: This part were summarized and revised, according to reviewer suggestion.

 

Introduction:

-How would you describe the main problems? Provide literature about the negative and positive impacts of different fertilizers on soil microbial populations.

√ In Introduction: the related information about main problems were added, and the related information about negative and positive impacts of different fertilizers on soil microbial populations were added, according to reviewer suggestion.

 

Materials and Methods:

-Sites and cropping system: Over the study period, was the testing location consistent?

√ In Sites and cropping system: the testing location was consistent.

-Experimental design: Have you considered the distance between different plots? Give an explanation.

√ In Experimental design: the related information about distance between different plots were added, according to reviewer suggestion.

-2.4.3. Flux turnover rate of SMBC and SMBN: Use the Word equation system to present the formula.

√In 2.4.3. Flux turnover rate of SMBC and SMBN: the format of equation system were revised, according to reviewer suggestion.

-Yield of early rice and later rice: Is there a particular reason why you chose this moisture content?

√In Yield of early rice and later rice: yes, there had some moisture content at early rice and later rice harvest, and calculate the yield of rice need to dry.

 

Discussion:

-There should be improvements to the discussion section. In the discussion section, you should discuss the meaning, significance, and relevance of your results. It should explain and evaluate your findings, relate them to your literature review, and support your overall conclusion. An additional results section is not necessary.

√In Discussion: this section were revised, the related information about additional results section were deleted, according to reviewer suggestion.

 

The revised manuscript has been submitted to your journal. Once again, thank you for your help and support during the process of the improvement of the manuscript and we look forward to your positive response.

 

Yours sincerely,

Hai-ming Tang

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors the research topic is interesting and relevant. A detailed description of some methodologies and empirical formals would add to quality of publication. Some of comments given in the text may please be addressed.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

< Agronomy >

< Agronomy- 1934449>

 

Dear Editor,

Thank you very much for your useful comments and suggestions on our manuscript. Please convey our gratitude to the editorial and reviewers who have made useful and detailed suggestions for improvement of the manuscript. As their suggestions we have revised the language and the content with red color in the manuscript. The details of the changes in this manuscript were listed belowing in point form:

 

Reviewer 2

1. Dear authors the research topic is interesting and relevant. A detailed description of some methodologies and empirical formals would add to quality of publication. Some of comments given in the text may please be addressed.

√ In “2.2. Experimental design” section: the more detail related information about fertilizer managements and cropping system were added, according to reviewer suggestion.

 

2. What a^-1 is depicting here and also in fig.3. Is it year? Please correct biomass in axis title.

√ In fig.2 and fig.3, a^-1 was represent year. And the axis title were revised, according to reviewer suggestion.

 

The revised manuscript has been submitted to your journal. Once again, thank you for your help and support during the process of the improvement of the manuscript and we look forward to your positive response.

 

Yours sincerely,

Hai-ming Tang

Author Response File: Author Response.doc