Drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization influenced fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid region

Priyanka Gautam; S. R. Bhunia; A. Sahoo; R. K. Sawal; Shantanu Rakshit; V. K. Yadav; B. Lal; Ramniwas; Gograj; Rajesh Bishnoi; V. S. Rathore

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288090

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJanuary 18, 2023
8 Mar 2023 Decision Letter - Arun Kumar Shanker, Editor PONE-D-23-01558Drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization influenced fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid regionPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Gautam, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 22 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Arun Kumar Shanker Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services. If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free. Upon resubmission, please provide the following: ● The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript ● A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a supporting information file) ● A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new manuscript file) 3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability. "Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized. Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access. We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter. 4. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ 5. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well. Additional Editor Comments: The reviewers have suggested revision, the authors are requested to incorporate the suggestions and submit the revised MS [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: I Don't Know ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: Your paper "Drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization influenced fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid region" addresses the fodder quality of groundnut. Problem of fodder deficiency and quality is severe in arid regions. Paper is written well. Introduction describes a clear background and significance of the problem to be solved. Methodology is described thoroughly. Results and discussion section written well. However, it needs to be revised to check spell mistakes and for language improvement. In conclusion, only a few lines are enough describing key findings of the study. Reviewer #2: Please address the following suggestions and comments Line 14: “However, no researchershavegiven emphasis” insert space between words. Line 22: Define PE in Abstract Line 58: “20-22 irrigation” Author means no. of irrigations? Too high? Cite it if yes, please! Line 62: “regions of India.Drip irrigation” insert space after full stop. Line 115: Define FIR ? Line 185: Typo error in unit of WUE. Line 202: Table 1, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 233: Table 2, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 258: Table 3, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 273: Table 4, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 275: Table 5, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 305: Table 6, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 332: Table 7, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Line 336: “Effect drip irrigation” Effect of drip irrigation Line 379: “Effect drip irrigation” Effect of drip irrigation Line 426: “0-60 kg ha-1” 0-60 kg ha-1 Reviewer #3: The research investigated the effect of drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization on fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid region. It tested the hypothesis that these two factors, at suitable levels, can save enough water and improve forage quality of groundnut in hot arid region where water and forage are important resources. I consider the research relevant and suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. However, I think the manuscript can be improved further. I therefore have the following suggestions. 1. The manuscript needs to be further proof read to improve the English further. Few grammatical errors or omissions such as in line 1, 38, 49, 92-93, 194, 222-223, 352, 369 etc can be avoided. 2. Please include the reference to the point raised in line 77-79, ‘In most of the 78 groundnut growing tracts, the level of available sulphur reaches below the critical limit and groundnut crop is bound to suffer on account of sulphur deficiency.’ 3. In line 95-97, the data presented was minimum to maximum rather than maximum to minimum e.g ‘The maximum and minimum temperature ranged between 26.6℃ to 43.2℃ and 8.5℃ to 31.1℃ 4. It will be nice if the authors present the initial soil test of the location used. Authors can provide them if available 5. In your statistical analysis, please confirm that the data followed normal distribution and equal variances, which justifies the use of ANOVA. 5. In your results and tables, I will prefer you include the exact P values for the main effects and the interactions. This will make comparism easier. 6. When reporting the specifics in the first few tables, you did not mention which planting year you are referring to. One can only generally assume that both years followed the same trend, but this was also not mentioned by the authors. 7. Thank you. ****** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No Reviewer #3: No ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288090.r001
Revision 1
11 Apr 2023 Author Response Reviewer 1 Your paper "Drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization influenced fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid region" addresses the fodder quality of groundnut. Problem of fodder deficiency and quality is severe in arid regions. Paper is written well. Introduction describes a clear background and significance of the problem to be solved. Methodology is described thoroughly. Results and discussion section written well. However, it needs to be revised to check spell mistakes and for language improvement. In conclusion, only a few lines are enough describing key findings of the study. We want to thank reviewers for appreciating our reports. Agreed and complied; Manuscript is revised for language and spellings, extra lines were deleted from conclusion. Reviewer 2 Line 14: “However, no researchershavegiven emphasis” insert space between words. Agreed and complied Line 22: Define PE in Abstract. Agreed and complied Line 58: “20-22 irrigation” Author means no. of irrigations? Too high? Cite it if yes, please! corrected the line and reference is provided for rest sentence Line 62: “regions of India.Drip irrigation” insert space after full stop Agreed and complied Line 115: Define FIR? It is a seed treatment sequence of fungicide, insecticide, Rhizobium, Defined in text also Line 185: Typo error in unit of WUE. Agreed and complied, unit is changed accordingly Line 202: Table 1, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 233: Table 2, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 258: Table 3, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 273: Table 4, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 275: Table 5, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 305: Table 6, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 332: Table 7, Add letters to show significant differences between treatment means. Agreed and complied Line 336: “Effect drip irrigation” Effect of drip irrigation Agreed and complied Line 379: “Effect drip irrigation” Effect of drip irrigation Agreed and complied Line 426: “0-60 kg ha-1” 0-60 kg ha-1 Agreed and complied Reviewer 3 The manuscript needs to be further proof read to improve the English further. Few grammatical errors or omissions such as in line 1, 38, 49, 92-93, 194, 222-223, 352, 369 etc can be avoided. Agreed and complied; Manuscript is revised for language and spellings for improving the English. Please include the reference to the point raised in line 77-79, ‘In most of the 78 groundnut growing tracts, the level of available sulphur reaches below the critical limit and groundnut crop is bound to suffer on account of sulphur deficiency. Agreed and complied; Reference is added In line 95-97, the data presented was minimum to maximum rather than maximum to minimum e.g ‘The maximum and minimum temperature ranged between 26.6℃ to 43.2℃ and 8.5℃ to 31.1℃ Agreed and complied; It will be nice if the authors present the initial soil test of the location used. Authors can provide them if available Agreed and complied;Initial soil data was provided in the materials and methods section In your statistical analysis, please confirm that the data followed normal distribution and equal variances, which justifies the use of ANOVA. The data is having normal distribution and equal variances, same is mentioned in the text also In your results and tables, I will prefer you include the exact P values for the main effects and the interactions. This will make comparison easier. Agreed and complied; CD was already provided in the tables at 5% level of significance, now letters were also added to show the significant differences between treatment means When reporting the specifics in the first few tables, you did not mention which planting year you are referring to. One can only generally assume that both years followed the same trend, but this was also not mentioned by the authors. Table 1, 6 and 7 data of both the years presented and in table 2 & 4, data of 2020; in table 3 & 5, data of 2021 was provided and same was mentioned in table title/heading. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer comments.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288090.r002
19 Jun 2023 Decision Letter - Arun Kumar Shanker, Editor Drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization influenced fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid region PONE-D-23-01558R1 Dear Dr. Gautam We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Arun Kumar Shanker Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Based on my evaluation of the revised manuscript and the author's response to the reviewers' suggestions, the authors have significantly improved the quality and presentation of their work. Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 6. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: All comments given to authors for improvements of the paper are addressed and it is acceptable now. ****** 7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No ******** https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288090.r003
Formally Accepted
26 Jul 2023 Acceptance Letter - Arun Kumar Shanker, Editor PONE-D-23-01558R1 Drip irrigation and sulphur fertilization influenced fodder yield, quality and water use efficiency of groundnut in arid region Dear Dr. Gautam: I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Arun Kumar Shanker Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288090.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .