Evaluation of Cyperus Fertility Improvement in Aeolian Soils from an Application of Humic Acid Combined with Compound Fertilizer
, Xianmei Zhang 2,4,*, Fanrong Meng 5,6, Guodong Chen 1,3, Ruodi Wang 6, Ziyi Ma 6, Zhenquan He 7,8, Guosheng Gai 5,8 and Jinhu Zhi 1,3,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author should check the following remarks
1-Adjust Table 1 (EC.. CEC)
2-Check type and size of subtitles... exp:3.1 Effects of humic acid and compound fertilizer application on the growth and yield of Cyperus. 3.1.1 Effects of combined application of humic acid and compound fertilizer on the growth of Cyperus...
3- Results: check that the units are written for all the values: exp 9.75cm and 4.04= 9.75cm and 4.04cm...
4-References: the references are written non-homogeneously: check
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsCheck overall english grammer and spellings.
Check overall references in text and the last literature cited.
1. Mention studied crop or plant in Title
2. Provide information for the cultivation season of Cyperus esculentus, seed rate, row to row distance, plant to plant distance and viability test. Basal dose of fertilizer at the time of cultivation.
3. How much seed rate used for Cyperus…. For how much area
4. At which stage Cyprus harvested for tuber yield or leaf length and width determined
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageNeed grammer and spelling correction for overall manuscript
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe reviewed manuscript is devoted to the assessment of the introduction of humic acid into sandy soil. This problem is relevant for low-fertile sandy soils. The authors obtained original data on the effect of this fertilizer on the agrochemical properties of the soil and plant development. In general, the results obtained correspond to the generally accepted changes occurring in the soil when such organic substances are introduced. The originality of the data obtained is characterized by geographical belonging to zonal soils. The work can be recommended for publication.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsManuscript Number: processes-2623535-peer-review-v1
Title: Evaluation of Fertility Improvement in Aeolian Soils by the Application of Humic Acid Combined with Compound Fertilizer
Comments
In this present study, authors focused on ''Applicant of Humic Acid Combined with Compound Fertilizer for Improving Fertility of Aeolian Sandy Soil and plant growth''. This article is well written, technically sound and in well scientific style. However, manuscript needs to address certain critical points before recommending it for publication.
1. The abstract of this manuscript is not well written need to carefully revised it and add your significant results.
2. Introduction section is not well written please update with few latest references.
3. Novelty point of view, authors have suggested to mention, how this present study is unique from already published work.
4. Please add GIS map location of study area in the material and methods section.
5. Please indicate full form of IOR in the manuscript.
6. The expression of figures not good, please check color, standard error bar on columns. Furthermore, in the figures 5 and 7 why authors did not mentioned the data according to 0-20 to 20-40cm soil depth?
7. The expression of tables looks not good; please remove sublines in the tables 1, 2 and 5.
8. The expression of figure 3, 4 and 6 look not good, if possible please change into colored form.
9. The studied treatment design is looking not enough. The data is also not enough. If possible, please add soil microbial activity and add mechanism.
10. Discussion section is not well written; need to be strengthen with relevant and latest literature according your results and focus on mechanism.
11. Please add a correlation table or RDA/Correlation matrix/Heat map correlation etc. If possible.
12. Conclusion section is not well written, please revise it very carefully and move significant result from conclusion to abstract section.
13. Manuscript need to be revised for grammatical and typo error.
14. Finally, the language of the manuscript should be improved to increase the readability of the manuscript.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Manuscript Number: processes-2623535-peer-review-v1
Title: Evaluation of Fertility Improvement in Aeolian Soils by the Application of Humic Acid Combined with Compound Fertilizer
Comments
In this present study, authors focused on ''Applicant of Humic Acid Combined with Compound Fertilizer for Improving Fertility of Aeolian Sandy Soil and plant growth''. This article is well written, technically sound and in well scientific style. However, manuscript needs to address certain critical points before recommending it for publication.
1. The abstract of this manuscript is not well written need to carefully revised it and add your significant results.
2. Introduction section is not well written please update with few latest references.
3. Novelty point of view, authors have suggested to mention, how this present study is unique from already published work.
4. Please add GIS map location of study area in the material and methods section.
5. Please indicate full form of IOR in the manuscript.
6. The expression of figures not good, please check color, standard error bar on columns. Furthermore, in the figures 5 and 7 why authors did not mentioned the data according to 0-20 to 20-40cm soil depth?
7. The expression of tables looks not good; please remove sublines in the tables 1, 2 and 5.
8. The expression of figure 3, 4 and 6 look not good, if possible please change into colored form.
9. The studied treatment design is looking not enough. The data is also not enough. If possible, please add soil microbial activity and add mechanism.
10. Discussion section is not well written; need to be strengthen with relevant and latest literature according your results and focus on mechanism.
11. Please add a correlation table or RDA/Correlation matrix/Heat map correlation etc. If possible.
12. Conclusion section is not well written, please revise it very carefully and move significant result from conclusion to abstract section.
13. Manuscript need to be revised for grammatical and typo error.
14. Finally, the language of the manuscript should be improved to increase the readability of the manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe method does not contain the properties of humic, especially the C ∕ N ratio.
The references of methods for the physical and chemical properties of the soil were not found.
Why did the samples collection of plants and soil after 60 days? These measurements had to be tracked in several stages.
The discussion is poor.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 6 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled "Evaluation of Fertility Improvement in Aeolian Soils by the Application of Humic Acid Combined with Compound Fertilizer" was reviewed. Here are my comments on it:
1) Typographical errors were detected. Some of them are highlighted in the attached file.
2) It is unnecessary to mention the author's first name in citations inside the text.
3)The time of the experiment is not known.
4) How to apply fertilizers, planting and harvesting time, amount of irrigation, and its frequency are not known
5) The main challenge of this study is its one-year duration. The results of one-year experiments are not recommended for a wide geographical area.
6)The discussion section is very short and weak.
7) The conclusion section is just the repetition of the results, while only the most important results should be mentioned and should include recommendations or suggestions.
8) In general, the use of humic acid is not a new topic and numerous studies have been conducted on it. In general, it should be said that the manuscript is not innovative.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Moderate editing is needed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 7 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe introduction is effectively organized and properly cited.
the methodology can be improved:
If possible, please provide a figure illustrating the distribution of plots in the experimental design.
what's about the IOR treatment?
What's the rationale behind selecting frequencies F1 and F2?
Why did you opt for a working depth of 40cm? Are you confident that there is no significant deep percolation?
All of the cited references are pertinent to the research.
The results are evidently and coherently presented.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReviewer comments
Manuscript ID: processes-2623535-peer-review-v2
The manuscript entitled “Impact of physiochemical properties, microbes and biochar on bioavailability of toxic elements in the soil: A review”, submitted to chemosphere journal.
The authors have done a remarkable job and overall the manuscript is well written and carefully revised as per raised comments and presents new scientific knowledge to the scientific world. Before acceptance of this manuscript to the journal, I recommend minor suggestions:
· Authors have repeated (table 6) two times. Please correct it.
· The studied treatment design is looking not enough please add few more parameters.
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 6 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript has been improved to some extent.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing is needed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
