Effects of Metal Oxide Nanoparticles on Nitrous Oxide Emissions in Agriculture Soil

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Title.
In my opinion, it is concise and clear.
· Abstract.
Line 15: “soil environments”: all the environments have soil. Please, clarify what you mean.
L25-26: That the “different effects of the three metal oxide NPs on N2O emissions may be due to their distinctive toxic effects” is something that is already known. The conclusions should show something more: why is this important? What do you recommend in terms of soil management and agriculture systems?
This last part of the abstract, in my opinion, should be revised.
In relation to the previous comment, in line 49 you say that “ecosystem processes play an important role in N2O emissions”. Agricultural ecosystems are cultural and socio-economic ecosystems with their own human-controlled “processes”. This (very good) paper lacks a more in-depth analysis of the relationship between the use of NPs and agricultural systems or models of soil management. This is THE key in order to understanding the importance of this research and how to use its findings.
· 1. Introduction.
L49: Please, see the previous comment.
L56: processES (I think that this word should be in plural – However, I am not a native speaker, so please verify what is the correct option).
L57: application → applied
L 58: “…nitrification potential” (REFERENCE SHOULD BE INCLUDED), while…”
L77-80: This is related to the comment “L49”. I think that the explanation of your objective should be completed: your initial objective is clear (to measure the influence of NPs on N2O emissions) but the real question is why these measurements are important? What is the final/real objective? What is the real application of the knowledge you are providing? (utility of the quantitative measures)
Apart from the above-mentioned, the section is well organized and clear.
· 2.1. Studied soil and nanoparticles
L86-88: please, inform the readers if the soil was previously cultivated and, if yes, which kind of species during the last years. If not, which kind of land use or land cover it had.
L89: “silty clay loam”: please, specify if this category is attending to USDA, WRB, or other classification (this comment is also related to L202).
· 2.2 Microcosm setup
L94: “…NPs and the…” → “NPs. The…”
L99: “25°C” → 25 “_” ºC (same in L110, 117, Table 1, etc.)
The rest of the explanation of the methodology is perfectly structured and described.
· Results section
This section is perfectly constructed and presented.
· Discussion
L218: there was no significant difference → there were no significant differences
The section is also perfectly written and explained, BUT
In my opinion, the section should end by offering an approximation as to the agricultural systems and soil management models that could be related to the described findings.
This comment is related to the one I did in the abstract section.
· Conclusions
Also related to the previous comment, I believe that one very important conclusion could be connected with the possible implementation of the findings in their practical use in agriculture practices.
I found this section to be the only weak one as it is addressed as a summary of the results and not like a real (in my opinion) conclusion section. You should tackle here the important and (as I already said) the applicability of the findings in real practices and agricultural models.
The overall recommendation is “Accept after minor revision”, as the paper, in general, is very well written, and structured, and it addresses the most relevant issues connected with the studied problem. Nevertheless, there is one major problem related to the comment about the applicability of the findings (in the abstract and conclusions).
The rest of the comments can be easily addressed by the authors and should be solved in the next version of the document.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting investigation in which the effect of soil applied different metal oxide nano particles was studies. this will contribute well in the field of nano technology in agriculture. This clears the effects of nano particles on soil biota through functional gene distribution.

Abstract: Give clear-cut findings of your study instead of proposed hypthesis in the last statement

Introduction: add some more recent studies which show the effects of metal oxide nano particles on soil biota/ enzymes

Material and methods: give justification of metal oxide concentration in microcosms which i think is very high

Line 97 it is water holding capacity

sampling time is very long it was better to take in hours why it was not taken hourly

results:

Discuss more about figure and justify the correlation

conclusion: very general give clear cut findings of the study

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is improved after revision and native english Editing is needed.