Sustainable Analysis of Maize Production under Previous Wheat Straw Returning in Arid Irrigated Areas

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

The present article entitled “Sustainable analysis of maize production under previous wheat straw returning in arid irrigated areas” is based on a good theme.  The authors have compiled the experiment in a nice way. However my still concern is about the 10 years  old experiment.  Is this  old data of 2012 will be valid in 2023.

The present article entitled “Sustainable analysis of maize production under previous wheat straw returning in arid irrigated areas” is based on a good theme.  The authors have compiled the experiment in a nice way. However my still concern is about the 10 years  old experiment.  Is this  old data of 2012 will be valid in 2023.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

No more comments

No more comments

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 4)

It can be seem that authors revised the manuscript according to the review comments and the paper quality have been improved.

Author Response

Thanks for your affirmation of the manuscript, the manuscript has been revised in detail according to other reviewers.

Reviewer 4 Report (Previous Reviewer 5)

Make the corrections given in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present article  entitled "Sustainability analysis of maize production in arid irrigated areas "is based on a good theme. However our major concern is about the time period at which experimental data has been taken. 

The data has been taken from 10-12 years old experiment or samples but in last  ten years significant changes have been found in the climatic conditions or the soil qualities, Then this experimental output has been justified in 2023.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

1.       Please epxplain the meaning of carbon efficiency in figure 5.

2.       Please show the content of soil organic carbon and in my opinion, the CO2 emission relate to the C decomposition and formation it should be considered. Otherwise, the title cannot show the main content of the manuscript, please condsider to revise it.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments on sustainability-2287443

This manuscript presents a potentially interesting and significant question, that is to assess grain yield and water use efficiency based on grain yield, soil carbon emission characteristics, economic benefit were investigated, and sustainability evaluation index under maize production under wheat-maize rotation system. As well as, to improve the economic and environmental sustainability of maize production in arid irrigated areas.

L 122: add the table of climactic conditions in study area during experiment months

L 128: add the table of analysis of soil and irrigated water

L 255: correct with F. test using one-way ANOVA and add the reference which used

Tables 1 and: statistical letters must be superscript

Table 1, 2 and figures 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7: don’t use this sentence “The descriptions of the treatment names were the same as Fig. 2” add all details of abbreviations under every table and figure.

L 462: Discussion needs more and more amendments and, have to be more stand on the effects of wheat straw returning on maize yield, and water use efficiency. Also, the influence of different wheat straw returning management practices on carbon emission and economic efficiency. further, the discussion needs more explanation’s for significant results.

L 612: references

L 640, 666: the year is bold

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript entitled “Sustainability analysis of maize production in arid irrigated areas” described the sustainable evaluation of environmental and economic benefit effects of no-tillage and straw return. The study is well-structured. The work is interesting and has a certain of meaning.

1. As far as I am concerned, authors should revise the title considering that this paper is about no-tillage and straw return whilst neither of it mentioned in the title.

2. Line 123: Please add the province.

3. Line 333-334: Please revised the sentence. Like: “Soil carbon emissions during the maize growing season was significantly affected by wheat straw returning approaches.”

Reviewer 5 Report

Make the requested corrections

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Reviewer 6 Report

Reviewers’ comments on Manuscript No. sustainability-2287443

 

 

Title	:	Need modifications as suggested below: Sustainability Analysis of Maize Production in arid irrigated areas or condition
Abstract	:	New Updated modifications needed as the manuscript must be updated.
Keywords	:	Need modifications as suggested in manuscript. Rearranged in alphabetical order.
Introduction	:	An introduction of manuscript is written in good structure and relevant to the study.   1.         Citation of similar works done by others quoting the references in proper format of the journal.   2.         Some modifications as suggested in manuscript.   3.         Line 56-80 and 81 to 101 must reduce its lengthiness as well as avoid repeating the same information statement. 4.            In place of “dry irrigated area” use “Arid irrigated area. 5.            No Hypothesis found.
Material and Method	:	The study was more than 10 years old i.e., conducted in between 2009-2012 and no current comparison was made with study. Therefore, it has become unethical to support the study and outputs which were more than a decade old. This leads me to not review this manuscript any further.