Characterization of Growth-Promoting Activities of Consortia of Chlorpyrifos Mineralizing Endophytic Bacteria Naturally Harboring in Rice Plants—A Potential Bio-Stimulant to Develop a Safe and Sustainable Agriculture
, Md. Bokhtiar Rahman 1,†, Aminur Rahman 2,*, Md. Ahedul Akbor 3, Sibdas Ghosh 4, Mst. Nur-E-Nazmun Nahar 1, Simo 1, Md. Shamsuzzoha 5, Kye Man Cho 6 and Md. Azizul Haque 1,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The scientific work is interesting, exhaustive, and well-written. The topic is very interesting and actual because of the current demand to find options for soil bioremediation.
I recommend the publication of the article in Microorganisms after addressing the following issues in the manuscript:
50-52 -Please rephrase the sentence, it doesn't really make sense
122-123 – “Then, the samples were cultured into pesticide containing medium as described “- The samples were transferred again into a new pesticide containing medium after 4 days?
195 – S. aureus
434 – –S. aureus
437 – S. aureus , 440, 446 -Check the document, it should be written in small letters all over
What was used as a positive control for the analysis of antimicrobial activity? - Please add in the method section
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript describes the isolation of several endophytic bacterial strains from rice plants (roots, stems and leaves), different biological activities were tested, including the plat promoting profile, hydrolytic enzymes production, antibacterial activities, as well as, dye and pesticide degradation. According the multiple biological evaluations the bacterial strains with the better characteristics were those in consortium 4.
The manuscript should be accepted for publication after addressing the following commentaries
Main commentaries:
In lines 204-211, please explain, which was the rationale for the consortia conformation?
The authors carried out a great number of experiments, but need to explain how each biological activity evaluated is needed to establish the strains profiles as plant biostimulants and how contribute to assessing safe and sustainable agriculture. Plant growth-promoting activities evaluations are directly related to the title and the objective of the study, but please explain in the manuscript why it is needed to evaluate antimicrobial activity, hydrolytic enzymes production, and the dye and pesticide degrading activities? And how does the determination of these activities complement the plant growth-promoting profile of the evaluated consortia?
Additional commentaries:
In line 75, eliminate pesticides, due insecticides are pesticides
In line 82, include at least a one relevant reference to support the following information “However, commercial farming of this vital crop is under immense threat from pests, insects, and diseases along with both the biotic and abiotic stresses leading to annual loss of yield up to 50% globally”
In line 83, the fragment “54,500 metric ton pesticide was applied in 2020”, could be better “54,500 metric tons pesticide were applied in 2020”, review pertinence and adapt all similar redactions in the manuscript
In line 121 and 127, correct the centigrade symbol, be sure all centigrade symbols in the whole manuscript have the adequate format
In line 124, use adequate abbreviation for grams, g instead gm, be sure all grams abbreviation are correct in the manuscript
In line 137, use L instead l for liters, correct in whole manuscript for “µl and ml”
In line 173, add a space in “0.5mg”
In line 195, correct “S. Aureus”
In lines 204-211, which was the rationale for the consortia conformation?, please explain
In line 213, correct “(106cfu/ml for Rice plant) as (106 CFU/mL for Rice plant), correct all cfu as CFU
In line 215, correct “for 48 - 72 hours” as “for 48-72 hours”
In line 282 and 285, use “p” instead “?”
In figure 1, adequate the scales in the both Y axes, for better visualization of the graphic
In line 299, which means TSI?
In line 304, which means MR test?
In Table 1, correct the format of the column names, for better reading of the information
In line 321, choose and adequate synonym for “aggressive”
In line 326, Klebsiella pneumonia should be Klebsiella pneumoniae
In line 389, Figure 4A, should be Figure 4
In Figure 4A, the results of N fixation are not adequately observed, pictures quality improvement is needed
All figure 4 (A and B), conform them as just one figure with multiple panels or use continue numbering, in line 421, Figure 4B, should be Figure 5
In figure 4B, adequate the scales in the both Y axes, for better visualization of the graphic
In lines 434, 437, 440 and 446, correct “S. Aureus”
In table 2, correct the bacterial species names
In table 2, review the format, values presentation is confusing
All figure 5 (A, B, C, D, E and F), conform them as just one figure with multiple panels or use continue numbering
Carefully review the manuscript and make all format and style corrections
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors´ addressed adequately all the reviewers' commentaries on the manuscript, After corrections I consider the manuscript could be accepted for publication
