Superabsorbent Polymer Hydrogels for Sustainable Agriculture: A Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

compliments on the very extensive study.

I suggest shortening the text and omitting some parts. There are some minor errors and typos that I have highlighted in the text.

Since there were no economical evaluations presented in this review I suggest staying in the frames of controlled vegetable and flower production and/or urban gardening - smaller scale applications of hydrogels. 

Otherwise, the paper is very well written. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to reviewers’ comments

 

Reviewer 1:
Comments	Reply
There are some minor errors and typos that I have highlighted in the text.	All corrections are effected on the manuscript as suggested using track changes
I suggest staying in the frames of controlled vegetable and flower production and/or urban gardening - smaller scale applications of hydrogels.	The manuscript was tailored with the contest on the importance of hydrogel as water and nutrient conservation.
Compliments on the very extensive study.	Thanks
Reviewer 2:
Comments	Reply
I recommend adding a discussion section on predicting models under different climate change scenarios, as well as utilizing different materials for each of these scenarios.	Line 195-224: Impacts of climate change on Water for Agriculture were discussed in relation to hydrogel
Explain more about the method used for nano release" and "smart release" fertilizer and seed coating by the hydrogel.	Line 526-559: the method used for nano release" and "smart release" fertilizer were explained as suggested
The mode of action for polysaccharide hydrogel on microorganisms and plant roots needs to be more clearly discussed.	Line 708-755: mode of action for hydrogel on microorganisms was presented
Describe more about the characteristics of super absorbent polymers (in terms of climatological description).	Line 296-373:
Introduction needs improvement.	Line 35-131: the introduction was improved as suggested with track changes
Please use newer publications for literature review.	Some outdated references were replaced with more recent
Details about the dataset are missed! Provide a new section by name of "data uses" and provide some graphs and tables from your data used	This current manuscript presents background, definitions, and opinions with some researches, but it is not required to report information about how the researches were selected
Draw a flowchart from your workflow that briefly shows the process of the methodology.	The manuscript is divided into sections and subsections to reflect the workflows
The innovation of the paper should be further characterized.	Line 747-767: Conclusion improved

 

Reviewer 2 Report

General comment: 

The authors showed a brief review of superabsorbent polymers hydrogel for sustainable agriculture. Climate change has been reported as a factor affecting the spatial water availability, while in this study, you didn’t consider this factor since the study since the variables reproducing climatic conditions is assumed to be fairly homogeneous. In addition, many studies have reported that climate change does pose a significant impact. There are different types of hydrogels. Mitigation of water scarcity over time is important. There is a duty to suggest that the hydrogel's properties and occurrence will definitely change. In this regard, I recommend adding a discussion section on predicting models under different climate change scenarios, as well as utilizing different materials for each of these scenarios.

 

Specific  comments:

It is an interesting manuscript with valuable findings, but needs some corrections according to the below:

- Explain more about the method used for nano release" and "smart release" fertilizer and seed coating by the hydrogel. In the review, the mode of action for polysaccharide hydrogel on microorganisms and plant roots needs to be more clearly discussed. Which method did you use and why?

- Describe more about the characteristics of super absorbent polymers (in terms of climatological description).

- Introduction needs improvement.

- Please use newer publications for literature review.

- Details about the dataset are missed! Provide a new section by name of "data uses" and provide some graphs and tables from your data used.

- Draw a flowchart from your workflow that briefly shows the process of the methodology.

- The innovation of the paper should be further characterized.

 

Constructive feedback:

 

While the mechanism of swelling and water holding in hydrogel as a soil conditioner is essential in biogeochemical cycles, studies about pollution from nonpoint sources under climate change scenarios have focused primarily on agroecosystems. As a result, warming significantly alters the composition and diversity of agricultural watersheds. Under climate warming, water ecosystems are mostly studied from the perspective of pollutant loads in aquatic plants, plankton, fish, and the interaction between plants and macrophytes; however, few studies are dedicated to microbial functions. Pollutant loads of different functions play a role in the carbon and nitrogen cycles and are important to the water ecosystem's stability. In light of this, studies of the processes of carbon and nitrogen cycling in water bodies under different warming patterns are necessary to better understand nutrient cycling processes under the changing water environment

It is recommended that the Conclusion section discusses the main constraints of the research. Therefore, investigating the effects of sorbent planning is of great significance for predicting the future trend of the application of hydrogel in agriculture and the land ecosystem.

 

Summary:

 

It is a nice,  but short manuscript dealing with material for improving water availability. One of the new things is a description of polysaccharide hydrogels as agents for controlling plant diseases. In my opinion, the authors have organized the content well. However, I would suggest adding more Figures. I would like to see more tables and graphs.

Author Response

Response to reviewers’ comments

 

Reviewer 1:
Comments	Reply
There are some minor errors and typos that I have highlighted in the text.	All corrections are effected on the manuscript as suggested using track changes
I suggest staying in the frames of controlled vegetable and flower production and/or urban gardening - smaller scale applications of hydrogels.	The manuscript was tailored with the contest on the importance of hydrogel as water and nutrient conservation.
Compliments on the very extensive study.	Thanks
Reviewer 2:
Comments	Reply
I recommend adding a discussion section on predicting models under different climate change scenarios, as well as utilizing different materials for each of these scenarios.	Line 195-224: Impacts of climate change on Water for Agriculture were discussed in relation to hydrogel
Explain more about the method used for nano release" and "smart release" fertilizer and seed coating by the hydrogel.	Line 526-559: the method used for nano release" and "smart release" fertilizer were explained as suggested
The mode of action for polysaccharide hydrogel on microorganisms and plant roots needs to be more clearly discussed.	Line 708-755: mode of action for hydrogel on microorganisms was presented
Describe more about the characteristics of super absorbent polymers (in terms of climatological description).	Line 296-373:
Introduction needs improvement.	Line 35-131: the introduction was improved as suggested with track changes
Please use newer publications for literature review.	Some outdated references were replaced with more recent
Details about the dataset are missed! Provide a new section by name of "data uses" and provide some graphs and tables from your data used	This current manuscript presents background, definitions, and opinions with some researches, but it is not required to report information about how the researches were selected
Draw a flowchart from your workflow that briefly shows the process of the methodology.	The manuscript is divided into sections and subsections to reflect the workflows
The innovation of the paper should be further characterized.	Line 747-767: Conclusion improved

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am happy to see that all corrections were implemented. 

Keep up with the good work.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you. This is an excellent reported study, and I approve of its publication. The review process should help you to improve your paper.

Congratulations.