PONE-D-25-15778Impact of climate change on millet yield under different fertilization levels in three agroecological zones of Niger RepublicPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mohamed,

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 Sep 07 2025 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,

Ahmed Kheir, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 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. Please include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met.  Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript. 3. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why. 4. Please note that PLOS ONE has specific guidelines on code sharing for submissions in which author-generated code underpins the findings in the manuscript. In these cases, we expect all author-generated code to be made available without restrictions upon publication of the work. Please review our guidelines at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-code and ensure that your code is shared in a way that follows best practice and facilitates reproducibility and reuse. 5. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files. 6. Please provide a complete Data Availability Statement in the submission form, ensuring you include all necessary access information or a reason for why you are unable to make your data freely accessible. If your research concerns only data provided within your submission, please write "All data are in the manuscript and/or supporting information files" as your Data Availability Statement. 7. Please amend either the title on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the title in the manuscript so that they are identical. 8. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright. We require you to either present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or remove the figures from your submission: a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.   We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.” Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission. In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].” b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful: USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.htmlNASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/ 9. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. 

[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

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

**********

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: 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:  The study accolades a relevant and timely model-based assessment of pearl millet production in Niger’s Sahel region. Given that pearl millet is a major staple crop and most of the country’s production comes from this region, assessing its response under current and future climate scenarios is both scientifically and practically important. The crop already suffers from low yield, partly due to climatic stress and biotic pressures. Therefore, simulating Genotype × Environment × Management interactions offers a promising approach to identify management strategies that could help close the yield gap. The manuscript is generally well written—especially the abstract and introduction, which provide a good narrative flow. However, the Materials and Methods, as well as Results and Discussion sections, could be improved substantially.

Abstract:

The abstract is reasonable. However, please briefly mention the calibration procedure (location and time), and specify how many and which GCMs were used.

General:

It was difficult to note down detailed comments as the manuscript lacks line numbers—please include them in future versions.

Introduction:

It would be more informative to start by stating where the Sahel region is located and why it is favourable for millet cultivation (e.g., spring temperatures, rainfall distribution). Also, please clarify whether the 62% figure refers to total millet production or total cereal production in the region.

Materials and Methods:

Please include a table summarising model parameters, especially if multiple cultivars were used. Provide relevant cultivar information. Replace the term “evaluation” with “validation” throughout the manuscript. Also, instead of just writing “DSSAT,” use the full model name—DSSAT-CERES-Millet—consistently.

Results and Discussion:

Discuss the limitations of the study more explicitly. It would be useful to include how future improvements can be made. The impact of temperature rise and phenological shifts is well documented in existing literature; the novelty here could be strengthened by assessing nitrogen stress under low-fertility scenarios, which are common in these environments. This would be more meaningful than reiterating known phenology shifts. Also, early flowering and maturity will require a shift in fertiliser application strategies—this should be discussed clearly. You may consider drawing on previous studies that have addressed nitrogen limitations in similar agroecological zones.

Conclusion:

The conclusion should be expanded with more actionable insights—e.g., shifting sowing windows, identifying or breeding suitable ideotypes, and aligning fertiliser management with changing crop phenology.

Figures and Tables:

Please add standard deviation or error bars to figures. If possible, conduct ANOVA to test for significant differences among GCM outputs. For Figure 9, since biomass data was not used for model calibration, I suggest omitting biomass-related outputs from the model application results.

Reviewer #2:  Firstly, I appreciate the effort has been spent to produce such a valuable study. Contents and tools are up to date and mostly important in those types of studies. I appreciate also that the author's team has produced the work without receiving specific funding, which is by itself a great success.

I have some minor corrections as follows:

1- According to the submitted manuscript standards of the journal, you would need to number the lines all over the manuscript with a continuous numbering. This would make our job as reviewers.

2- In the abstract, in line 6, you need to substitute the word "reduced" to "shortened". In line no. 9, you need to put the word "scenarios" instead of "models". In line no. 11, you need to correct the phrase to "Climate Change's threat".

3- in the conclusions, in line no. 1, you need to correct the phrase to "has been proven". In line no. 4, you need to correct a phrase to "on the study".

With all my best wishes of success and continuous progress.

**********

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

**********

[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.

PONE-D-25-15778R1Impact of climate change on millet yield under different fertilization levels in three agroecological zones of Niger RepublicPLOS ONE

Dear Dr.  Mohamed,

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 Oct 30 2025 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,

Ahmed Kheir, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. 

2. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Reviwer#1The study accolades a relevant and timely model-based assessment of pearl millet production in Niger’s Sahel region. Given that pearl millet is a major staple crop and most of the country’s production comes from this region, assessing its response under current and future climate scenarios is both scientifically and practically important. The crop already suffers from low yield, partly due to climatic stress and biotic pressures. Therefore, simulating Genotype × Environment × Management interactions offers a promising approach to identify management strategies that could help close the yield gap. The manuscript is generally well written—especially the abstract and introduction, which provide a good narrative flow. However, the Materials and Methods, as well as Results and Discussion sections, could be improved substantially.

Abstract:

The abstract is reasonable. However, please briefly mention the calibration procedure (location and time), and specify how many and which GCMs were used.

General:

It was difficult to note down detailed comments as the manuscript lacks line numbers—please include them in future versions.

Introduction:

It would be more informative to start by stating where the Sahel region is located and why it is favourable for millet cultivation (e.g., spring temperatures, rainfall distribution). Also, please clarify whether the 62% figure refers to total millet production or total cereal production in the region.

Materials and Methods:

Please include a table summarising model parameters, especially if multiple cultivars were used. Provide relevant cultivar information. Replace the term “evaluation” with “validation” throughout the manuscript. Also, instead of just writing “DSSAT,” use the full model name—DSSAT-CERES-Millet—consistently.

Results and Discussion:

Discuss the limitations of the study more explicitly. It would be useful to include how future improvements can be made. The impact of temperature rise and phenological shifts is well documented in existing literature; the novelty here could be strengthened by assessing nitrogen stress under low-fertility scenarios, which are common in these environments. This would be more meaningful than reiterating known phenology shifts. Also, early flowering and maturity will require a shift in fertiliser application strategies—this should be discussed clearly. You may consider drawing on previous studies that have addressed nitrogen limitations in similar agroecological zones.

Conclusion:

The conclusion should be expanded with more actionable insights—e.g., shifting sowing windows, identifying or breeding suitable ideotypes, and aligning fertiliser management with changing crop phenology.

Figures and Tables:

Please add standard deviation or error bars to figures. If possible, conduct ANOVA to test for significant differences among GCM outputs. For Figure 9, since biomass data was not used for model calibration, I suggest omitting biomass-related outputs from the model application results.

 Reviewer#2

Firstly, I appreciate the effort has been spent to produce such a valuable study. Contents and tools are up to date and mostly important in those types of studies. I appreciate also that the author's team has produced the work without receiving specific funding, which is by itself a great success.

I have some minor corrections as follows:

1- According to the submitted manuscript standards of the journal, you would need to number the lines all over the manuscript with a continuous numbering. This would make our job as reviewers.

2- In the abstract, in line 6, you need to substitute the word "reduced" to "shortened". In line no. 9, you need to put the word "scenarios" instead of "models". In line no. 11, you need to correct the phrase to "Climate Change's threat".

3- in the conclusions, in line no. 1, you need to correct the phrase to "has been proven". In line no. 4, you need to correct a phrase to "on the study".

With all my best wishes of success and continuous progress.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

[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.

Impact of climate change on millet yield under different fertilization levels in three agroecological zones of Niger Republic

PONE-D-25-15778R2

Dear Dr. Ali

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support .

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,

Ahmed Kheir, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: