Effect of Mineral Fertilization and Microbial Inoculation on Cabbage Yield and Nutrition: A Field Experiment
, Carlos A. Marcillo-Paguay 1, Daniel F. Rojas-Tapias 2 and German A. Estrada-Bonilla 2,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript is clear and well-written. The use of a consortium of microorganisms is demontrated in this study.
I have few remarks :
line 127 : ad the valu of the pH if it was controlled and also the % of dissolved oxygen setp point.
line 131 : were the microorganisms prepared in deionized water ?
line 132 : in combination, was the final total concentration also 1 x 108 CFU mL-1 ?
Figure 2 : modify to suppress some white spaces
Is it necessary to present the equations for this study ? Maybe , comparing each point could be a better way !
Figure 5 : did you check the effect of microorganisms alone ? If yes, why do not you present the results ?
Figure 5 : did you check the final ration of each microorganisms when using them as a consortium ?
Please, discuss more the role of the different microorganisms used in the consortium.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments:
There was an important variation between the cultivation cycles, which was not explained, considering that the temperature and rainfall conditions in the two periods did not have obvious differences.
The results must be interpreted in the context of a soil with high nutrient availability used in the assessment.
The soil density can be high for the textural class and can be indicative of physical limitations to plant growth.
It is not clear whether the rainfall indication (Figure 1) includes irrigations carried out.
The indication of the significant effect with an asterisk must be made for the equation and its coefficients “a” and “b” and not for R2.
In Figure 4, correct the colors of the bars at dose 100.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
After reviewing the manuscript, in my opinion, it addresses an important and timely research topic. The use of bacterial formulation in agriculture is gaining more and more interest because of the benefits that can be obtained from it. In my opinion, the design of the experiment is appropriate, however, for the other parts of the manuscript I have some comments with suggestions.
In my opinion, the table of supplementary materials should be included in the main body of the manuscript.
L60 In my opinion, biological nitrogen fixation by bacteria and the mechanisms of making nitrogen available to plants should also be mentioned, especially since the bacterial strains used in the experiment exhibit such properties. Also in my opinion, it would be appropriate to describe more extensively how bacteria mobilize P in the soil. It would also be good to mention other benefits associated with the use of bacterial formulation.
L200 The drawing needs improvement in quality. Why is there a break in the dashed line?
L239 With 100% NP fertilization, there is no designation for large
L281 In my opinion, this section is the biggest problem in the manuscript. I suggest focusing more on the effects of fertilization and the use of the bacterial formulation on the various traits analyzed, describing the putative mechanisms that caused this, and comparing with the results of other researchers. Only 6 other manuscripts were referenced throughout the section. I also believe that the authors should take a critical look at their research and indicate why in some cases the effect of bacterial formulation on the analyzed traits was not obtained. The use of bacterial formulation in agriculture is currently very extensively researched worldwide and there are a number of studies on their effects on crops and indicated reasons for the effectiveness or lack thereof of their use.
L315 The conclusions are mostly a repetition of the results section. In my opinion they should be shortened and improved. I believe that recommendations should be included for the introduction of combinations of fertilizer amounts with inoculation into agricultural practice and indicate the prospect of further field research
L354 References section in my opinion also needs improvement. Of course, the publisher does not apply rigid standards for the form of this section, but it should at least be uniform.
Good luck!
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
