Exploring Suitable Biochar Application Rates with Compost to Improve Upland Field Environment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors,
The authors report on “Exploring suitable biochar application rates with compost to improve crop productivity and conserve soil quality for rotation cultivation in an
upland field ". The authors investigated the effect of biochar with compost on crop productivity, GHG emissions, and soil quality. They found that biochar application rates had positive effect on crop yield, and soil quality.
While the current manuscript provides useful information and represents a valuable contribution about an important subject, the manuscript must be improved substantially. This manuscript is poorly written however the content and data quality are highly valuable. Written presentation must be improved by simplifying the language, shortening complex sentence structures, organizing sentence structure, correcting many apparent typographical errors, and enlisting the aid of an English language editor or editing service.
Detail Comments and suggestions for the authors to improve the quality of this manuscripts are provided in sticky notes in the manuscript attached along with these major comments.
- Title is very long.
- Abstract: Please re-write the abstract. First sentence is not clearly understood.
- Introduction: Please provide a couple of sentences on compost.
- Methodology: Statistical analysis must be described in detail.
- Acronyms should not be used in the beginning, without its explanation.
- Notations to be followed after the equation.
- Please do not use redundant sentences (same in the introduction, and discussion part).
- Rewrite conclusion part.
Thank you very much!
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
The authors report on “Exploring suitable biochar application rates with compost to improve crop productivity and conserve soil quality for rotation cultivation in an upland field ". The authors investigated the effect of biochar with compost on crop productivity, GHG emissions, and soil quality. They found that biochar application rates had positive effect on crop yield, and soil quality.
While the current manuscript provides useful information and represents a valuable contribution about an important subject, the manuscript must be improved substantially. This manuscript is poorly written however the content and data quality are highly valuable. Written presentation must be improved by simplifying the language, shortening complex sentence structures, organizing sentence structure, correcting many apparent typographical errors, and enlisting the aid of an English language editor or editing service.
Detail Comments and suggestions for the authors to improve the quality of this manuscripts are provided in sticky notes in the manuscript attached along with these major comments.
Response : Thanks for your kind comments. The manuscript has been extensively revised including the content indicated in the pdf file by the reviewer, and English editing has been newly conducted, and an English editing certification has been attached. If you are not satisfied with our revision, please contact me again. We will do our best to revision and answer.
*For reducing bias associated with growing seasons, soil conditions, environmental factors, etc, the field experiment must be conducted at least for two years or two growing seasons.
à I agree to your opinion. This study was a basic experiment to evaluate effect of biochar application rates through field test. Our study is in progress. In addition, additional studies related to climate change are underway and the results of various environmental factors are being reviewed. Could you please understand this aspect and give your acceptance?
*I would love to see ANOVA table for each of the parameters described, with respective P-values.
à First of all, I am very sorry. It was not easy to understand your description. The total fluxes related to CO2 and N2O are presented in Table 2.
*What does r values do here.
à r value means the linear equation and polynomial equation in Figure 5.
*Quadratic equation rather than polynomial suits better here.
à I agree to your opinion. Figure 5 showed the polynomial as a quadratic equation.
Point 1: Title is very long.
Response 1: According to reviewer’s comment, I revised the title.
Point 2: Abstract: Please re-write the abstract. First sentence is not clearly understood.
Response 2: Thanks for your opinion. I modified abstract section.
Point 3: Introduction: Please provide a couple of sentences on compost.
Response 3: According to your suggestion, we have included compost-related information in the introduction.
Point 4: Methodology: Statistical analysis must be described in detail.
Response 4: We have added some information about statistical analysis.
Point 5: Acronyms should not be used in the beginning, without its explanation.
Response 5: I am sorry. We reconfirmed and revised the acronyms throughout the paper.
Point 6: Notations to be followed after the equation.
Response 6: We referred to a paper recently published in Agronomy and expressed the same equation.
Point 7: Please do not use redundant sentences (same in the introduction, and discussion part).
Response 7: Thanks for your opinion. Actually, there are no duplicate sentences, but it is true that there are sentences with similar content. Our research team tried to express the research results and discussions naturally by citing the overall contents. Hence, we thought that it would be appropriate to insert this content. Could you please understand this aspect and give your acceptance? I would like to appreciate deeply your kind review and comment. I am not sure whether I understood exactly your comments and suggestions, or not. If there is something problem on my understanding, could you please give your queries, again? I will do my best to revise the manuscript and give my opinion.
Point 8: Rewrite conclusion part.
Response 8: Thanks for your opinion. I modified conclusion section.
Thanks for your positive review, again.
I am looking forward to seeing your positive evaluation soon.
Best regard
Ju-Sik Cho
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript ,,Exploring suitable biochar application rates with compost to improve crop productivity and conserve soil quality for rotation cultivation in an upland field,, solves the application of biochar together with compost to improve crop productivity and at the same time solves the preservation of soil quality.
The manuscript contains interesting results that are well worked out, but some things still need to be discussed extensively.
Please be sure that your manuscript thoroughly establishes how this work is fundamentally novel. Specific comparisons should be made to previously published materials that have a similar purpose. Please present a strong case for how this work is a major advance. This needs to be done in the manuscript itself, not just in the response to review comments. This is a very important point on the basis of which I will deal with your manuscript below.
Please be sure that your abstract and your Conclusions section not only summarize the key findings of your work but also explain the specific ways in which this work fundamentally advances the field relative to prior literature.
The significance of this study should be more emphasize in the introduction.
This paper can be helpful. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11368-016-1361-1
Line numbering needs to be added in the future for better handwriting control.
Introduction: ,, In addition, biochar is very useful in the agricultural environment because it has unique characteristics, including pH, cation exchange capacity (CEC), specific surface area, and bulk density, when
produced under different pyrolysis methods,, This statement of yours supports this important document, so the authors are encouraged to add it here as a reference to improve the introduction. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021001525
,,0.27 dS m-1,, Check the correct notation of SI units in the entire manuscript.
All equations with explanations must be of better quality throughout the manuscript.
Figure 2: Enter these graphs in color.
Figure 3 and 4: Distinguish the curves by color so you can better see the differences in the results.
Table 2: How many times have you taken the measurement for each sample. What were the measurement deviations.
You also did not consider structural characterization of the biochar used, for example by FTIR spectroscopy. You could estimate the adsorption capacity based on the functional groups.
Extend the conclusions with all your most important findings. Indicate the possible risks of such research. Add your recommendations for future research
Make sure the references are added correctly according to the journal's instructions.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
The manuscript,, Exploring suitable biochar application rates with compost to improve crop productivity and conserve soil quality for rotation cultivation in an upland field,, solves the application of biochar together with compost to improve crop productivity and at the same time solves the preservation of soil quality.
The manuscript contains interesting results that are well worked out, but some things still need to be discussed extensively.
Please be sure that your manuscript thoroughly establishes how this work is fundamentally novel. Specific comparisons should be made to previously published materials that have a similar purpose. Please present a strong case for how this work is a major advance. This needs to be done in the manuscript itself, not just in the response to review comments. This is a very important point on the basis of which I will deal with your manuscript below.
Response : Thank you for your evaluation. According to reviewer’s comments, this manuscript was properly revised.
Point 1: Please be sure that your abstract and your Conclusions section not only summarize the key findings of your work but also explain the specific ways in which this work fundamentally advances the field relative to prior literature.
Response 1: Thanks for your detail comments. I understand the reviewer’s concern on abstract and conclusion sections. Therefore, according to your comment, we reviewed the manuscript and rewritten the abstract and conclusion.
Point 2: The significance of this study should be more emphasize in the introduction.
This paper can be helpful. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11368-016-1361-1
Response 2: Thanks for your opinion. We were checked your comment (Luo ea al., 2017. Use of biochar-compost to improve properties and productivity of the degraded coastal soil in the Yellow River Delta, China). We added this reference.
Point 3: Line numbering needs to be added in the future for better handwriting control.
Response 3: When we first submitted, we numbered. Could you please check original manuscript?
Point 4: Introduction: ,, In addition, biochar is very useful in the agricultural environment because it has unique characteristics, including pH, cation exchange capacity (CEC), specific surface area, and bulk density, when produced under different pyrolysis methods,, This statement of yours supports this important document, so the authors are encouraged to add it here as a reference to improve the introduction. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021001525
Response 4: Thank you for recommending an interesting article that was recently published. We have added this paper in reference section.
Point 5: 0.27 dS m-1,, Check the correct notation of SI units in the entire manuscript.
Response 5: We marked the units according to the SI unit regulations.
Point 6: All equations with explanations must be of better quality throughout the manuscript.
Response 6: I am very sorry. I am not sure whether I understood exactly your comments, or not. It was not easy to understand your description. I think the equation used in the experiment has been proved through references. If there is something problem on my understanding, could you please give your queries, again? I will do my best to revise the manuscript and give my opinion.
Point 7: Figure 2: Enter these graphs in color.
Response 7: We inserted it in white.
Point 8: Figure 3 and 4: Distinguish the curves by color so you can better see the differences in the results.
Response 8: We modified figures.
Point 9: Table 2: How many times have you taken the measurement for each sample. What were the measurement deviations.
Response 9: All results were performed in 3 replicates, and the measurement deviations are the standard deviations for 3 replicates.
Point 10: You also did not consider structural characterization of the biochar used, for example by FTIR spectroscopy. You could estimate the adsorption capacity based on the functional groups.
Response 10: Thanks for your opinion. The FTIR result of biochar is used as an important indicator for removing contaminants. Actually, this study was an experiment to evaluate effect of biochar application through field test. Also, this manuscript was focused mainly on comparing growth characteristics of two crops and CO2 & N2O emissions under biochar application rates. Instead, I have showed the following results of soil fertility to utilize biochar (Figure 5). Could you please understand this point? If there is something problem on my understanding, could you please give your queries, again? I will do my best to revise the manuscript and give my opinion.
Point 11: Extend the conclusions with all your most important findings. Indicate the possible risks of such research. Add your recommendations for future research.
Response 11: Thanks for your good comment. I agreed to your opinion. In the conclusion section, I reviewed again in our results to increase the credibility of this study and to help subscribers understand it.
Point 12: Make sure the references are added correctly according to the journal's instructions.
Response 12: We have revised the references according to the regulations of the journal.
We really appreciate for the reviewer’s good comments to improve this manuscript.
I am looking forward to seeing your positive evaluation soon.
Best regard
Ju-Sik Cho
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors,
Thank you for addressing each and every comments and suggestions from reviews. The manuscript has been improved significantly. I have recommended to add this reference in the report: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137012, particularly in the introduction part. I found this article very interesting and worth to mention.
Thank you.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript ,,Exploring Suitable Biochar Application Rates with Compost to Improve Upland Field Environment,, has been improved. It can now be accepted.
