Effect of Varying Nitrogen and Micronutrient Fertilization on Yield Quantity and Quality of Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) Achenes
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Manuscript Title: Effect of varying nitrogen and micronutrient fertilization on yield quantity and quality of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) achenes
The present manuscript“Effect of varying nitrogen and micronutrient fertilization on yield quantity and quality of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) achenes”, has discussed the effect of soil nitrogen doses (60 and 90 kg ha-1 ) and additional foliar fertilization (B, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, Zn) on selected plant characteristics, yield and quality of sunflower achenes,Even though there has been a lot of research on sunflower cultivation, this article still contribute to the existing scientific database. However, there were some formatting errors and still lacks some innovations.Thus, I suggested that the manuscript need to be major revised before it is accepted by this journal.
The following specific comments are observed:
1. Line 10: The “a” should be changed as “this”.
2. Line 50: there was a wrong sentence “however they are not not low”,rephrase the sentence for better clarity.
3. Line 161: Not aligned up and down and forgot to superscript
4. Most of the data analysis parts are not sharp enough,for example line256-261
5. Line 294: wrong indentation in header of table 5
6. This experiment carried out six treatments, you can find more possibilities and analyzable points in terms of innovation, instead of only comparing groups A and F most of the time.
7. This article cites the conclusions of a large number of other researchers. Unfortunately, the listing of this part is very blunt. The author should do a summary and re-integrate the language.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Effect of varying nitrogen and micronutrient fertilization on yield quantity and quality of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) achenes
|
Number |
Comment |
|
59-60 |
Indicate why organic fertilizers have a beneficial effect on the chemical composition of sunflower achenes. |
|
67-68 |
Why does nitrogen fertilization have a positive effect on sunflower growth and development, but could worsen the quality parameters of the achenes? |
|
82-84 |
Tarabily et al. indicated that nitrogen constituted more than 80% of all minerals absorbed by plants and significantly limited plant performance, especially under water deficit conditions. What water deficit is the author referring to, the amount of volume absorbed or the concentration of irrigation water? Clarify! |
|
99-100 |
El-Din Mekki considered boron to be important in sunflower seed fertilization. Deficiency of this micronutrient in the soil reduced both crop size and quality. How can the author be sure that there is no other micronutrient? Describe and clarify further in the review |
|
205-206 |
How was the yield of achenes and their percentages of crude fat and total protein calculated? Indicate the equations and their units. |
|
Figure 1 until Figure 8 |
Indicate the variable and units being plotted on the y-axis of all figures. |
|
Table 6 |
Make a 3-line table, as you did in table 5. Also, homogenize the whole document, so that it has the same structure. |
|
343-348 |
How can the author argue that the diameter of the head and the number of achenes in the head were significantly modified by fertilization and not by the amount of water supplied? |
|
367-370 |
What effect did foliar nutrient spraying have on sunflower? |
|
387-388 |
Sunflower yields ranged between 3.5 and 3.85 t ha-1, which was a good result. Indicate that it is a good result that allows to establish if it is close to below or close to above, or if it is in the average t ha-1 |
|
416-418 |
In the second year of the study, fat yield was most affected by combined nitrogen fertilization In what respect do you make this comparison? |
|
|
|
|
General comments |
|
|
1. The summary does not have enough elements to define what is important in the review. Change it and synthesize better.
2. There is no conclusion of the importance of the study described in the review as a closing section. This section is recommended to highlight the main findings in the development of the review.
3. The work is interesting. However, can the author cite briefly what is the contribution of his research to science? |
|
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Author
The author must follow the following comments:
Ø Line 19 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 20 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 21 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 41-49 delete these sentences, because there is no relation between your work and this information
Ø Line 50 delete not
Ø Line 64 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 178 What does it mean
Ø Line 178 Is this the time for planting in the both seasons?
Ø Line 199 Is this the harvest day for the two seasons?
Ø Line 202 Please specify the samples number and the samples weight
Ø Line 202 Explain which chemical compositions were determined
Ø Line 232 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 239 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 257 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 264 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 273 kg N ha-1
Ø Figure 5 change 2000 to 2020
Ø Line 293 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 301 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 304 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 309 kg N ha-1
Ø Figure 8 change 2000 to 2020
Ø Line 318 kg N ha-1
Ø Table 6 Follow the rules of tables
Ø Line 335 kg N ha-1
Ø Line 339 change modified to increased or decreased
Ø Line 344 change modified to increased or decreased
Ø Lines 353-381 rewrite and improve the discussion
Ø Lines 390-398 rewrite and improve the discussion
Ø Lines 409-411 What is the relation between your work and the pollinating insects?
Ø Lines 422,423,427
Ø Line 453 kg N ha-1
Ø Please see the Pdf version
Best regards
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have no comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
I recommend the publication in the present form
With best wishes
