Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2024 Jun 11;19(6):e0302135. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302135

Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable production

Tajwar Alam 1,2,*, Muhammad Ikram 2, Arshad Nawaz Chaudhry 2, Chaudhry Muhammad Subhan 3, Khaled D Alotaibi 4, Zia-Ul -Haq 3, Muhammad Sohail Yousaf 5, Hasan Pervej Ahmed 6, Nida Fatima 2, Ghulam Jilani 2, Muhammad Shakir Farooq 2, Mohammad Naseem 2, Muhammad Ishaq 2,*
Editor: Taimoor Hassan Farooq7
PMCID: PMC11166280  PMID: 38861530

Abstract

Soilless agriculture is acknowledged worldwide because it uses organic leftovers as a means of supporting intensive and efficient plant production. However, the quality of potting media deteriorates because of lower nutrient content and excessive shrinkage of most organic materials. A current study was undertaken to identify the optimal blend of locally available organic materials with desirable qualities for use as potting media. Therefore, different ingredients, viz., Pinus roxburghii needles, sugarcane bagasse, and farmyard manure were used alone or in combination as potting media to test their suitability by growing spinach as a test crop. Results showed that an increase in Pinus roxburghii needles and sugarcane bagasse decreased medium pH and electrical conductivity. Higher pH and electrical conductivity were recorded for the treatments having a higher farmyard manure ratio (≥50%) in combination. Except for pine needles 100%, pH and electrical conductivity were in the recommended range. The growth attributes include, leaves plant-1, shoot length, fresh- and dry shoot weight along with plant macronutrients (nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium) and micronutrients (iron, copper, manganese, and zinc) content were higher in treatment pine needles 50%+farmyard manure 50% followed by pine needles 25%+farmyard manure 50%+sugarcane bagasse 25%. Moreover, the particular treatment of pine needles 50%+farmyard manure 50% exhibited the highest concentrations of macro- (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) as well as micronutrients (iron, copper, manganese, and zinc) in the potting media following the harvest. This study highlights the potential of utilizing agro-industrial litter/waste as a soilless growing medium for spinach production under greenhouse conditions. When employed in appropriate proportions, this approach not only addresses disposal concerns but also proves effective for sustainable cultivation. Further research is needed to investigate the use of these wastes as potting media by mixing various particle-size ingredients.

1. Introduction

Growing plants without soil as a rooting medium is called a soilless plant culture [1]. Compared with soil-based cultivation, it is cost-effective, producing higher crop yield and prompter harvest from smaller pieces of land [2]. Moreover, soilless potting media generally contains higher nutrient and water use efficiency [3]. Soilless culture systems for vegetable production are becoming popular worldwide due to several issues, including pests and diseases in the soil, soil quality, and lack of fresh water for irrigation [4]. As a result, during the past 50 years, their significance has grown on a global scale [5]. However, the quality of the potting media has a major impact on the success of substrate culture. When choosing materials for soilless potting media, it’s important to consider factors like adequate drainage, high water retention, high ionic exchange capacity, and lack of pathogens, weeds, and pests [6]. Additionally, for optimal natural recycling, the material should be readily available, less expensive, and ideally organic [7].

Numerous studies have focused on finding a low-cost, locally accessible substance like farmyard manure (FM), particularly as a substitute for peat when producing decorative pot plants [8] and vegetables [9]. However, variability in growing substrate can pose significant problems by affecting growth rate and plant nutrition. The use of organic wastes as potting media protects the environment by decreasing ecosystem damage caused by peat or soil extraction [10] and provides economic benefits, as the use of organic residues like FM is cheaper as compared to conventional materials [11].

Pinus roxburghii is a widely distributed conifer in the Himalayas covering around 3000 km with 7.64 million hectares and covers around 0.40 million hectares area only in Pakistan [12]. Pine leaves/needles are waste products [13] which contain various biochemicals that are being used as an antiseptic, and liver tonic [14]. Pine needles are a good choice for potting media due to their suitable physical/chemical properties, availability, and lower cost. Additionally, it contains most of the essential nutrients required for plant growth [15, 16]. Pine needles/bark contain 0.3–0.5% nitrogen (N) [17] and a high C: N ratio ranging from 100 to 200 [18], lower EC, and very acidic, freshly ground, with a pH of roughly 3–4 [19]. Therefore, it can be mixed with other materials like FM to enhance its C: N ratio, pH, and EC for a successful growing media. Sugarcane is among the world’s major crops [20] and also the leading crop in Pakistan having the largest sugar market in terms of volume and the sixth largest sugarcane producer (around 87 million tonnes) globally [21]. Among the easily available organic residues, SB is one of the important organic wastes. It is a fibrous, pulpy waste that is a byproduct of the sugarcane industry having (47–52%) cellulose, (25–28%) hemicellulose, and (20–21%) lignin. It produces organic acids, that mobilize insoluble phosphorous (P) in the labile form and possess a significant quantity of essential plant nutrient content [22].

Several grades of perlite, pine bark, and peat moss have been evaluated as soilless growing media by [23] and found that coarse-grade perlite produced more commercially viable cucumber fruit compared to medium-grade perlite. Application of composted organic waste and biochar enhanced plant growth attributes and nutrient contents compared to peat media [24]. Various substrates were evaluated by [25] through growing tomatoes and reported that bark, peat, and peat in combination with bark had yields comparable to those of rock wool. Pine bark and sewage sludge blends were used as substitutes for peat in potting media and reported an increase in plant yield with the addition of organic refuse [26]. Imported peat’s high cost and environmental concerns have prompted researchers to look for substitute materials to use as growth substrates [27].

Soilless substrates are accepted alternatives and beneficial in fruit and vegetable production. The antioxidant activity of Chinese cabbage and spinach is increased when an organic substrate is added to the root media [28]. Many researchers have observed higher yield, and increase in sugar, vitamins, and carotenoid content of tomatoes grown in soilless potting media [25]. Organic matter contents, C: N ratio, bulk density, porosity, CEC, pH, EC and the presence of nutrient content are peculiar characteristics of growing substrate [29].

Therefore, objectives of the current study were to evaluate the physico-chemical properties of potting media derived from organic residues, identify how these properties influence vegetable production, and recommend the optimal utilization of these residues (FM, PN, and SB) as potting media. The hypothesis posited that the physico-chemical properties of potting media, obtained from organic residues, play a significant role in influencing the growth parameters of vegetables due to their richness in organic nutrients. The anticipation was that specific combinations of organic residues within the potting media would lead to optimized conditions conducive to enhanced vegetable production.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Site description

The study was undertaken in the greenhouse at Pir Mehr Ali Shah-Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, during 2020–2021. The site’s GPS location was latitude 32°17’48 N and longitude 72°21’9 E with 615m elevation from sea level and 1,346.8 mm annual rainfall. No rainfall was recorded during the experiment. Temperature was maintained at 28±2 °C while humidity was 65±5%.

2.2. Collection of potting media ingredients and their processing

A range of plant-based components was used in varying quantities to prepare the substrate, viz., falling leaves of Pinus roxburghii (PN), FM, and SB alone or in combination. P. roxburghii needles were collected from hills close to Islamabad, Pakistan (about 508 meters above sea level at 73° 02’ E longitude and 33° 36’ N latitude). The SB was collected from a local sugar mill and FM was collected from a nearby dairy farm. The SB and PN were sundried for 2 weeks in shade around 28–30 °C followed by oven drying for 24 h at 60 °C. The dried potting material was ground in a rotary grinding mill. To separate the potting mixes’ proper particle sizes, a 2 mm size mesh is attached. The ground potting media were filled in 10 kg pots. Each pot was filled with an equal amount of material, viz., 8 kg (by volume). The treatment combination was, PN100%, SB100%, PN50%+SB50%, PN50%+FM50%, SB50%+FM50%, and PN25%+FM50%+SB25%. The experimental design was completely randomized (CRD) with three replications.

2.3. Pre-analysis of material used

The material used for potting media was analyzed for various traits before the experiment. Chemical properties of FM are pH (7.54), EC (39 mSm−1), total N (0.96%), P (0.46%), potassium (K) (0.84%), copper (Cu) (66.2 mg kg−1), manganese (Mn) (141 mg kg−1) and zing (Zn) (48.31 mg kg−1). Pine leaves/needles chemical composition was recorded as, pH (4.89), EC (11 mSm−1), total N (0.22%), P (0.12%), K (0.14%), Cu (13.60 mg kg−1), Mn (112 mg kg−1) and Zn (33.1 mg kg−1). The SB had the following characteristics: pH 6.2, EC 0.14 mSm-1, C: N (47:1), N (0.15%), P (0.10%), K (0.13%), Cu (11.60 mg kg−1), Mn (102 mg kg−1) and Zn (26.1 mg kg−1).

2.4. Chemical analysis

Potting media pH was determined through pH meter using 1:10 ratios of sample water suspension and EC was analyzed by conductivity meter from supernatant liquid obtained from 1:10 ratio sample water suspension [30]. Muffle furnace was used to determine the organic carbon and samples dry ashing were carried out for 4.5 h at 550 °C. Wet digestion was undertaken to measure P, K, Cu, Mn Zn, and Fe contents. Digestate was used to analyze Cu, Mn, Zn, and Fe concentrations through Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) at various wavelengths, viz., Cu (324.8 nm), Mn (279.5 nm), and Zn (213.7 nm). Spectrophotometer was used to analyze P by following [31]. Wet-digested filtrate was obtained and dilution was done as per necessity. Before the analysis of samples working standards were run and the graph was plotted. The samples were run on spectrophotometer and readings were noted at 410 nm wavelength. Potassium concentration in the aliquot was noted on flame photometer by following [32]. The determination of total Kjeldahl-N involved taking 1 g of sample (air-dried) and mixing it with 3.5 g of digestate mixture (K2SO4: Se) in a digestion tube. To this mixture, 10 mL H2SO4 (conc.) was added, and the solution was heated for 30 minutes in block digester at 420 °C. Subsequently, distillation of digested sample was carried out in a conical flask using a distillation unit. The distillate from compost samples was collected in a 25 mL solution of 4% boric acid to which a few drops of bromocresol-green and ethyl red were added. The filtrate was then titrated using H2SO4 0.1 N and the total Kjeldahl-N was recorded by following [33].

2.5. Plant characteristics

Spinach was harvested and analyzed for various parameters, viz., shoot length, leaves per plant, shoot fresh weight were recorded and subsequently, dried in an oven for 72 h at 65±5 °C, and dry weights were noted. For the determination of P, K, Cu, Mn Zn, and Fe contents samples were ground to fine powder, and wet digestion was done. By using the digestate Cu, Mn, and Zn concentrations were analyzed with AAS. Spectrophotometer was used to determine the phosphorus concentration by following [31] while K concentration was measured in the aliquot using flame photometer following Knudsen et al. (1983). Total N was estimated as described by [33].

2.6. Statistical analysis

Data collected for different plant characteristics and potting media were analyzed statistically via Statstix 8.1 under a completely randomized design and LSD was employed to compare treatment means at a significance level of 5% [34]. Graphs were drawn with MS Excel 2010.

3. Results

3.1. Growth attributes and nutrient content of spinach

The highest (24.3 cm) and lowest (6.46 cm) plant height were obtained at the PN50%+FM50% and SB100% media, respectively (Fig 1a). Plant height was greatly boosted when PN and FM were used in combination compared with PN, SB, or FM alone. Also adding PN and SB to FM significantly increased plant height compared to these materials alone or in combination with PN and SB. The plants’ heights grown in PN50%+FM50% and PN25%+FM50%+SB25% were significantly higher than those grown in other treatments/combinations. Plant height was also increased significantly when SB was added to FM in comparison to the SB100%, PN50%+SB50%, and PN100% media, respectively. The highest fresh shoot biomass (24.3 g plant−1) was obtained by using PN50%+FM50% as planting media while the lowest shoot fresh biomass (1.91 g plant−1) was obtained for SB100% potting media (Fig 1b). Moreover, plants grown in PN50%+FM50% produced the highest shoot dry biomass and SB100% substrate produced the lowest shoot dry biomass (Fig 1c). Adding PN to FM or PN and SB to FM significantly increased both shoot’s fresh and dry biomass of spinach plants compared to the SB and PN solely (Fig 1a and 1b). A comparable pattern was noted for leaves per plant (Fig 1d). The highest and lowest leaves per plant were obtained by using PN50%+FM50% and SB100% as the media, respectively. When PN and SB were added to the FM instead of using PN or SB alone or in combination, the number of leaves per plant increased considerably.

Fig 1. Effect of substrate composition on plant growth and yield attributes.

Fig 1

Error bars indicate standard errors from mean (n = 3). PN (pine needles); FM (farmyard manure); EM (effective microorganism).

Nutrient contents in plant tissue showed significant responses to potting media. The highest N (3.03%) and K (1.26%) concentration in plant tissue was obtained at FM50%+PN25%+SB25% while the lowest N (2.15%) and K (1.01%) were obtained at the PN010% media (Fig 2a–2c) respectively. In the case of P, the highest P contents in plant tissues were recorded in SB50%+FM50% media while the lowest P contents were noted in plants grown at the PN100% media (Fig 2b). The concoction of SB and PN with FM significantly increased macronutrient contents in plant tissues compared with PN or SB alone.

Fig 2. Effect of substrate composition on spinach macronutrient content.

Fig 2

Error bars indicate standard errors from mean (n = 3). PN (pine needles); FM (farmyard manure); EM (effective microorganism).

Micronutrient content in plant tissues is shown in Table 1. The highest Cu and Zn contents were recorded for SB50%+FM50% media while the lowest values were obtained for PN100% (Table 1). In the case of Mn and Fe the highest values were noted for PN50%+FM50% media and the lowest Mn and Fe contents were recorded for SB100% media (Table 1). Using PN or SB alone or in combination produced the lowest nutrient contents in plant tissues however, adding SB and PN to FM significantly increased micronutrient contents.

Table 1. Influence of substrate composition on spinach micronutrient content.

Treatments Cu Zn Mn Fe
(mg kg-1) (mg kg-1) (mg kg-1) (mg kg-1)
PN100% 3.19±0.05 d 14.4±1.29 d 22.9±0.92 d 30.2±1.41 c
SB100% 3.34±0.02 c 23.4±0.54 c 18.2±0.15 e 22.7±0.96 d
PN50%+SB50% 3.16±0.03 d 16.2±0.95 d 19.3±0.58 e 26.6±0.44 c
PN50%+FM50% 4.36±0.01 a 42.5±0.87 b 52.9±0.09 a 81.2±1.33 a
SB50%+FM50% 4.39±0.01 a 48.3±0.77 a 42.4±0.46 c 73.7±1.67 b
FM50%+PN25%+SB25% 4.21±0.02 b 43.5±0.58 b 44.9±0.59 b 74.8±1.03 b

Each value is the mean of three replicates ± SD (n = 3). Different letters after means show significant differences (Tukey’s HSD test, p ≤ 0.05). PN: pine needles; FM: farmyard manure; EM: effective microorganism.

3.2. Physicochemical properties of potting media

Data related to physico-chemical properties has been shown in Table 2. Changes in pH and EC differed significantly among the various treatments. The highest pH (6.80) was recorded in SB50%+FM50% media while the lowest values for pH (6.12) were noted for PN100% media (Table 2). The salinity of potting media expressed as the EC of the saturated media extract varied greatly between potting media. The highest EC (125 dSm-1) values were recorded in SB50%+FM50% media while the lowest values for EC (78.7 dSm-1) were noted for PN100% media. The PN and SB media showed lower salt content compared to the potting media having FM in combination.

Table 2. Effect of the substrate composition on chemical properties of potting mix.

Treatments pH EC (mSm-1) N (%) P (%) K (%)
PN100% 6.12±0.05 b 78.7±3.36 d 0.62±0.03 c 0.029±0.00 b 0.498±0.01 b
SB100% 6.13±0.03 b 91.2±1.29 c 0.44±0.04 d 0.028±0.00 b 0.235±0.05 c
PN50%+SB50% 6.12±0.04 b 87.8±1.10 c 0.56±0.04 cd 0.029±0.00 b 0.308±0.01 c
PN50%+FM50% 6.69±0.06 a 114±2.72 b 1.54±0.06 a 0.064±0.00 a 0.819±0.11 a
SB50%+FM50% 6.80±0.10 a 125±2.79 a 1.26±0.05 b 0.062±0.00 a 0.646±0.08 ab
PN25%+FM50%+SB25% 6.76±0.06 a 117±2.71 b 1.34±0.06 b 0.063±0.01 a 0.680±0.07 a

Each value is the mean of three replicates ± SD (n = 3). Different letters after means show significant differences (Tukey’s HSD test, p ≤ 0.05). PN: pine needles; FM: farmyard manure; EM: effective microorganism.

The highest N % (1.54) P mg kg-1 (0.064) and K % (0.819) were obtained at PN50%+FM50% while the lowest nutrient contents were recorded in SB100% media (Table 2). Adding FM to PN significantly increased macronutrient contents in media compared to the SB and PN alone or their combination. The macronutrient contents were significantly higher in SB50%+FM50% and PN25%+FM50%+SB25% than the rest of the treatment combinations (Table 2).

Micronutrient content in potting media has been shown in Table 3. The highest contents of Cu, Fe, and Mn were recorded for PN50%+FM50% media while the lowest values were obtained for SB100% (Table 3). In the case of Zn, the highest values were noted for SB50%+FM50% media, and the lowest Zn contents were recorded for PN100% media. Using PN or SB alone or in combination produced the lowest nutrient contents in potting media however, adding FM to SB and PN significantly increased micronutrient contents (Table 3).

Table 3. Influence of substrate composition on micronutrient content in potting mix.

Treatments Cu Fe Mn Zn
(mg kg-1) (mg kg-1) (mg kg-1) (mg kg-1)
PN100% 5.03±0.6 c 68.7±4.0 d 16.8±1.4 cd 22.6±1.2 c
SB100% 3.88±0.3 c 41.7±3.9 e 12.9±1.7 d 31.2±1.7 c
PN50%+SB50% 4.56±0.3 c 50.8±2.9 e 14.7±1.2 d 27.8±1.3 c
PN50%+FM50% 10.4±1.0 a 660±4.7 a 28.2±2.6 a 55.5±2.1 b
SB50%+FM50% 8.15±0.8 b 625±3.2 c 22.2±2.4 bc 66.9±2.5 a
PN25%+FM50%+SB25% 9.00±1.0 ab 642±2.7 b 24.3±1.3 ab 60.9±2.6 ab

Each value is the mean of three replicates ± SD (n = 3). Different letters after means show significant differences (Tukey’s HSD test, p ≤ 0.05). PN: pine needles; FM: farmyard manure; EM: effective microorganism.

4. Discussion

Unbalanced nutrition is responsible for reducing the soilless culture [35], therefore, differences in the growth of plants are linked to the chemical and physical features, though, understanding of these features is still not clear. Characterization of substrate and their statistical analysis depicted that a combination of FM with PN and SB could be an alternative for the substitution of imported material (sphagnum peat moss and coconut coir) using the soilless harvest technique for vegetable production. During this experiment, spinach plants were grown in different substrates alone or combinations. All the combinations having FM, PN, and SB favored the plant growth, and a significant difference was recorded with the treatments having only PN, SB, or their combination which is justified by the characteristics of these wastes.

Although many characteristics of potting media influence plant growth, pH is considered among the most important factors because it is directly connected to nutrient availability [36]. The pH of the FM is generally slightly higher to grow vegetables however, the addition of an acidic material like PN with FM gives favorable pH values for soilless growing media. The current study displayed that, except for SB50%+FM50%, pH for other combinations was in the desired range (5.8–6.8) having all essential nutrients available and considered suitable for most crops [37]. Optimum levels of pH differ with plant species (Ingram & Henley, 1993). Lower pH can lead to ammonium toxicity while at too high pH, micronutrients become deficient [36]. Potting media with suitable pH ranges between 5.3–6.8 which generally allows better nutrient availability without the danger of toxicity and these results follow our results [38]. Important factors influencing pH are the substrate, quality of irrigation water, the pH of fertilizer solutions, and the plant species. The P. roxburghii needles are acidic in nature which is why when these needles were used as potting media components pH remained lower as compared to other materials whereas, during the decomposition, different organic acids were produced which resultantly reduced the pH as observed in this study. Electrical conductivity depicts soluble salts in a medium and lower soluble salt contents are preferable for vegetable production [39] because higher EC inhibits biological activity, and plant growth [40]. In the current study, EC values were in the acceptable range (78.7–125 mScm−1) for all the treatments. Substrates with higher EC such as FM mixed with compost up to 50%, did not pose any detrimental impact on plant growth [37]. Critical ranges for EC could be different in different countries for EC of potting media.

All the combinations of growing media in this study were suitable for vegetable production as nutrient contents were in the acceptable ranges. Lower macro- and micronutrient contents were observed in the treatments where SB was used in higher ratios (100%) which contains lower nutrient contents as compared to other materials used in combination (Tables 2, 3). Generally, a low ratio of FM in combination resulted in lower nutrient content in growing media. A combination of FM with PN and SB showed better results as compared to sole PN, SB, or their combination. It may be due to lower EC and pH coupled with higher C: N ratio in these substrates. Crop attributes and their nutrient contents were increased when FM was used in combination with other inorganic amendments [41]. This is possible because of pH and EC adjustments along with higher nutrient content provided by the FM.

Specifically, the treatments PN50%+FM50% and PN25%+FM50%+SB25% exhibited the highest performance. It could be linked with higher microbial activity and community composition, which enhances substrate mineralization which in turn increases the nutrient concentration [35]. Therefore, the interaction between substrates affects plant growth attributes (height, leaves per plant, shoot fresh- and dry weight) and chemical attributes (pH and EC). Hence, the important aspect of potting media is to maintain the proper quantity of PN and SB in the mixture. By potting media, essential nutrients adherence to PN and SB can decrease the leaching of nutrients, favoring plant growth [42]. Furthermore, the addition of SB increased essential nutrient contents (N, P, and K) in the soil [43]. According to previous research, smaller quantities of SB in the substrates positively affected all the studied parameters [44] and similar results were obtained during the current study, though there was inconsistency between the SB ratio and plant growth [45]. Sugarcane bagasse enhances the physico-chemical attributes of potting media which promote plant growth [46].

The results of the current study are consistent with available literature which reports that FM contains higher nutrient contents and retains water during plant growth. Addition of SB and PN in the desired amount also favors plant performance. Sugarcane bagasse is commonly used in soilless culture however, in this study, it was added directly to assess its impact and observed positive impacts on plant growth as reported by [47]. During the experiments, it was observed that substrate composition has an impact on substrate pH. like the addition of PN produced acidic values but it remained within the desired range in all combinations. The versatility of PN and SB has also acted as organic matter sources and nutrient contents (macro- and micro) in combination with FM. Pine needles and SB in combination with FM improve the physico-chemical and biological characteristics of media [46].

Higher growth attributes and yield of plants grown in soilless potting media were also reported [48]. Similar results were reported by [49] that potting media having different organic materials produced higher plant biomass compared to potting media having a single ingredient and decreased the detrimental impact of heavy metals [50]. Growth parameters of plants vary owing to the physicochemical properties of substrate characteristics [10]. During this study, better spinach growth under greenhouse conditions was obtained with treatments PN50%+FM50% followed by PN25%+FM50%+SB25%. The increasing population contributes to the mismanagement of organic waste, necessitating proper handling. The study’s primary goal was to identify viable organic waste for growing vegetables that can reduce the environmental effect by producing value-added products.

5. Conclusion

During this study, various organic wastes, namely PN, FM, and SB, were examined to determine the optimal ratio for a soilless potting medium. Analyses revealed that among these agro-industrial wastes, FM exhibited a higher quantity of nutrient contents compared to PN and SB. The chemical composition of the raw materials affirmed that an effective substrate should consist of PN50%+FM50% and PN25%+FM50%+SB25% for growing spinach. The study showcased that altering the composition of the substrate could effectively regulate spinach plant growth in a soilless culture. Notably, the PN50%+FM50% treatment demonstrated the highest concentrations of both macro- (N, P, and K) and micronutrients (Fe, Cu, Mn, and Zn) in the potting media post-harvest. The ANOVA analysis revealed distinct differences among the substrates for various growth traits and chemical properties. Samples with the most favorable performance were those containing PN50%+FM50%, followed by PN25%+FM50%+SB25%. The results suggested that these agro-industrial wastes could contribute to cost reduction in soilless farming. However, further studies are recommended to explore these substrates concerning their particle size and their effectiveness in growing media.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to the Institute of Soil & Environmental Science, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi for providing laboratory and greenhouse for analysis and experiments.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding Statement

This study was funded by the College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University Researchers Supporting Project Number (RSPD2024R633). This funding was recieved by KDA.

References

  • 1.Raviv M, Lieth JH, Bar-Tal A, Silber A. Growing plants in soilless culture: operational conclusions. Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA. 2019:637–69. 10.1016/B978-0-444-63696-6.00014-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lakhiar IA, Gao J, Syed TN, Chandio FA, Tunio MH, Ahmad F, et al. Overview of the aeroponic agriculture–An emerging technology for global food security. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering. 2020;13(1):1–0. doi: 10.25165/j.ijabe.20201301.5156 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Massa D, Magán JJ, Montesano FF, Tzortzakis N. Minimizing water and nutrient losses from soilless cropping in southern Europe. Agricultural Water Management. 2020; 241:106395. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106395 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Stewart-Wade SM. Efficacy of organic amendments used in containerized plant production: Part 2–Non-compost-based amendments. Scientia Horticulturae. 2020; 260:108855. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108855 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Schmilewski G. Growing medium constituents used in the EU. International symposium on growing media. 2007; Sep 2 (pp. 33–46).
  • 6.Carlile WR, Raviv M, Prasad M. Organic soilless media components. Soilless Culture. 2019:303–78. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-63696-6.00008-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Mridha N, Ray DP, Singha A, Manjunatha BS, Biswas S, Saha B, et al. Prospects of natural fibre crop based plant growth substrate in soilless crop production system: A Review. 2021;129–139. doi: 10.30954/2347-9655.02.2021.9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Roohi M, Arif MS, Guillaume T, Yasmeen T, Riaz M, Shakoor A, et al. Role of fertilization regime on soil carbon sequestration and crop yield in a maize-cowpea intercropping system on low fertility soils. Geoderma. 2022; 428:116152. doi: 10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101660 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Dittrich C, Pecenka R, Løes AK, Cáceres R, Conroy J, Rayns F, et al. Extrusion of different plants into fibre for peat replacement in growing media: adjustment of parameters to achieve satisfactory physical fibre-properties. agronomy. 2021;11(6):1185. doi: 10.3390/agronomy11061185 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Agarwal P, Saha S, Hariprasad P. Agro-industrial-residues as potting media: Physicochemical and biological characters and their influence on plant growth. Biomass conversion and biorefinery. 2021:1–24. doi: 10.1007/s13399-021-01998-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Shakoor A, Shakoor S, Rehman A, Ashraf F, Abdullah M, Shahzad SM, et al. Effect of animal manure, crop type, climate zone, and soil attributes on greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural soils—A global meta-analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021; 278:124019. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124019 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.FAO. FAOSTAT Online Statistical Service. http://faostat.fao.org (accessed October 2007). United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome.
  • 13.Alam T, Jilani G, Chaudhry AN, Ahmad MS, Aziz R, Ahmad R. Terpenes and phenolics in alcoholic extracts of pine needles exhibit biocontrol of weeds (Melilotus albus and Asphodelus tenuifolius) and insect-pest (Plutella xylostella). Journal of King Saud University-Science. 2022;34(4):101913. doi: 10.1016/j.jksus.2022.101913 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Labib RM, Youssef FS, Ashour ML, Abdel-Daim MM, Ross SA. Chemical composition of Pinus roxburghii bark volatile oil and validation of its anti-inflammatory activity using molecular modelling and bleomycin-induced inflammation in albino mice. Molecules. 2017;22(9):1384. doi: 10.3390/molecules22091384 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Rana AK, Guleria S, Gupta VK, Thakur VK. Cellulosic pine needles-based biorefinery for a circular bioeconomy. Bioresource Technology. 2023; 367:128255. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Gartner JB, Williams D. A review of bark research for horticultural uses conducted at the University of Illinois. InTAPPI ALKA Conference 1977 (pp. 85–90).
  • 17.Ogden RJ, Pokorny FA, Mills HA, Dunavent MG. Elemental status of pine bark‐based potting media. Horticultural Reviews. 1987; 9:103–31. doi: 10.1002/9781118060827 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Mupondi LT, Mnkeni PN, Brutsch MO. Evaluation of pine bark or pine bark with goat manure or sewage sludge cocomposts as growing media for vegetable seedlings. Compost science & utilization. 2006;14(4):238–43. doi: 10.1080/1065657X.2006.10702291 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Nain P, Raverkar K, Chandra R, Pareek N, Guru S, Bhandari G. Characterization of pine needle and pine needle biochar: a potential soil amendment for sustainable forest waste management. Annals of Plant and Soil Research. 2023;25(2):211–20. doi: 10.47815/apsr.2023.10259 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Choudhary RL, Wakchaure GC, Minhas PS, Singh AK. Response of ratoon sugarcane to stubble shaving, off-barring, root pruning and band placement of basal fertilisers with a multi-purpose drill machine. Sugar Tech. 2017; 19:33–40. doi: 10.1007/s12355-016-0438-x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Khan ME. Products and by-products of sugarcane in Pakistan. Pakistan Sugar Journal. 2022;37(1). [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jamil M, Qasim M, Zia MS. Utilization of pressmud as organic amendment to improve physico-chemical characteristics of calcareous soil under two legume crops. J Chem Soc Pak. 2008;3(1):145–50. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ancy UA. Nutripriming and mat thickness on tray nursery in rice (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Agronomy, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara).
  • 24.Khan I, Iqbal B, Khan AA, Inamullah, Rehman A, Fayyaz A, Shakoor A, et al. The interactive impact of straw mulch and biochar application positively enhanced the growth indexes of maize (Zea mays L.) crop. Agronomy. 2022;12(10):2584. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12102584 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Gruda NS. Increasing sustainability of growing media constituents and stand-alone substrates in soilless culture systems. Agronomy. 2019;9(6):298. doi: 10.3390/agronomy9060298 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Guerrero F, Gascó JM, Hernández-Apaolaza L. Use of pine bark and sewage sludge compost as components of substrates for Pinus pinea and Cupressus arizonica production. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2002;25(1):129–41. doi: 10.1081/PLN-100108785 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nazir MJ, Li G, Nazir MM, Zulfiqar F, Siddique KH, Iqbal B, et al. Harnessing soil carbon sequestration to address climate change challenges in agriculture. Soil and Tillage Research. 2024; 237:105959. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2023.105959 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Machado RM, Alves-Pereira I, Lourenço D, Ferreira RM. Effect of organic compost and inorganic nitrogen fertigation on spinach growth, phytochemical accumulation and antioxidant activity. Heliyon. 2020;6(9). doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05085 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Atzori G, Pane C, Zaccardelli M, Cacini S, Massa D. The role of peat-free organic substrates in the sustainable management of soilless cultivations. Agronomy. 2021;11(6):1236. doi: 10.3390/agronomy11061236 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis, pentice hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India. 1973; 498:151–4. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Page AL. Methods of soil analysis. 1982.
  • 32.Knudsen D, Peterson GA, Pratt PF. Lithium, sodium, and potassium. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 1983; 9:225–46. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kjeldahl C. A new method for the determination of nitrogen in organic matter. Z Anal Chem. 1883; 22:366. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Steel RG, Torrie JH. Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill; 1986. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Zhang L, Sun X. Effects of rhamnolipid and initial compost particle size on the two-stage composting of green waste. Bioresource Technology. 2014; 163:112–22. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.04.041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Savvas D. Hydroponic production of vegetables and ornamentals (pp. 15–23). Passam H. (Ed.). Athens: Embryo publications; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Sanchez N, Ruiz RY, Cifuentes B, Cobo M. Controlling sugarcane press-mud fermentation to increase bioethanol steam reforming for hydrogen production. Waste Management. 2019; 98:1–3. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2019.08.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Abad E, Martínez K, Planas C, Palacios O, Caixach J, Rivera J. Priority organic pollutant assessment of sludges for agricultural purposes. Chemosphere. 2005;61(9):1358–69. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.03.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Farooq TH, Nawaz MF, Qasid M, Shakoor A, Ahmad I, Gul S, et al. Divergent consequences of bio-resources on morphological plasticity and biochemical responses in early-stage leguminous species: Sustainable productivity approaches. Geoscience Frontiers. 2023:101660. doi: 10.1016/j.gsf.2023.1016608 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Gondek M, Weindorf DC, Thiel C, Kleinheinz G. Soluble salts in compost and their effects on soil and plants: A review. Compost Science & Utilization. 2020;28(2):59–75. doi: 10.1080/1065657X.2020.1772906 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Alam T, Anwar-ul-Haq M, Ahmed MA, Hayat A, Fatima N, Babar S, et al. Soil Manuring and Genetic Variation Conjunctively Surmount the Partial Drought Stress in Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Plant and Environment. 2023;5(2):99–108. doi: 10.33687/jpe.005.02.4419 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Teixeira DL, de Matos AT, de Castro Melo E. Resistance to forced airflow through layers of composting organic material. Waste Management. 2015. 1; 36:57–62. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2014.12.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Meunchang S, Panichsakpatana S, Weaver RW. Co-composting of filter cake and bagasse; by-products from a sugar mill. Bioresource Technology. 2005;96(4):437–42. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2004.05.024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.III CL, White PM Jr, Spaunhorst DJ, Petrie EC. Impact of sugarcane bagasse ash as an amendment on the physical properties, nutrient content and seedling growth of a certified organic greenhouse growing media. Journal of Agricultural Science. 2017;9(7). doi: 10.5539/JAS.V9N7P1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Webber III CL, White PM, Petrie EC, Shrefler JW, Taylor MJ. Sugarcane bagasse ash as a seedling growth media component; 2015.
  • 46.Negim O, Mustafa A, Fouad H. Effect of pressmud, as an organic fertilizer, on some soil properties, growth of tomato plant and infestation of tuta absluta under saline irrigation water. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering. 2016;7(8):557–63. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2016.39799 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Dunlop SJ, Arbestain MC, Bishop PA, Wargent JJ. Closing the loop: Use of biochar produced from tomato crop green waste as a substrate for soilless, hydroponic tomato production. HortScience. 2015;50(10):1572–81. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.50.10.1572 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Chrysargyris A, Antoniou O, Xylia P, Petropoulos S, Tzortzakis N. The use of spent coffee grounds in growing media for the production of Brassica seedlings in nurseries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021; 28:24279–90. doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-07944-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Sachin TM, Thakur N, Sharma P. Use of alternative growing media in ornamental plants. International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2020; 8:188–94. doi: 10.22271/chemi.2020.v8.i6c.11079 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Subhanullah M, Hassan N, Ali S, Saleh IA, Ilyas M, Rawan B, et al. The detrimental effects of heavy metals on tributaries exert pressure on water quality, Crossocheilus aplocheilus, and the well-being of human health. Scientific Reports. 2024;14(1):2868. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-53340-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

22 Feb 2024

PONE-D-24-02845Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable productionPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Alam,

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 07 2024 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,

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

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. In this instance it seems there may be acceptable restrictions in place that prevent the public sharing of your minimal data. However, in line with our goal of ensuring long-term data availability to all interested researchers, PLOS’ Data Policy states that authors cannot be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-acceptable-data-sharing-methods).

Data requests to a non-author institutional point of contact, such as a data access or ethics committee, helps guarantee long term stability and availability of data. Providing interested researchers with a durable point of contact ensures data will be accessible even if an author changes email addresses, institutions, or becomes unavailable to answer requests.

Before we proceed with your manuscript, please also provide non-author contact information (phone/email/hyperlink) for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If no institutional body is available to respond to requests for your minimal data, please consider if there any institutional representatives who did not collaborate in the study, and are not listed as authors on the manuscript, who would be able to hold the data and respond to external requests for data access? If so, please provide their contact information (i.e., email address). Please also provide details on how you will ensure persistent or long-term data storage and availability.

3. Please amend the manuscript submission data (via Edit Submission) to include author "Zia-ul-Haq". 

4. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

Additional Editor Comments:

We invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

[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: No

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

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 article reports an innovative approach to utilize organic waste (pine needles, sugarcane bagasse, and farmyard manure) for making soilless potting media, which looks useful for organic food production. Basic analytical work and greenhouse experiments were undertaken precisely and reported with detailed methodology. Study results have been discussed to conclude that the technology bears commercial value. This manuscript merits publication in PLOS ONE after major improvements as suggested below:

1. I suggest the author remove abbreviated words from the abstract and revise it. Kindly use full names here.

2. Line 37-40: Kindly revise it. I found some inconsistencies in these sentences.

3. I suggest the author revise the keywords and it should be not the same as the title of the manuscript.

4. Line 81: Do not start the sentence with the reference. It looks awkward and not according to scientific standards.

5. At least mention three objectives and hypotheses of your current research and correlate them with the discussion section.

6. Check the references in the text and the reference section. Make sure it should be according to the journal format.

7. I suggest you some new references related to your study. Kindly cite them in your research article which will increase the worth of your article.

� Microplastics meet invasive plants: Unraveling the ecological hazards to agroecosystems

� Impacts of soil microplastics on the crops: A review. Applied soil ecology

� Harnessing soil carbon sequestration to address climate change challenges in agriculture

� Dynamic changes of soil nematodes between bulk and rhizosphere soils in the maize (Zea mays L.)/alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) intercropping system

� The detrimental effects of heavy metals on tributaries exert pressure on water quality, Crossocheilus aplocheilus, and the well-being of human health

� Influence of soil microplastic contamination and cadmium toxicity on the growth, physiology, and root growth traits of Triticum aestivum L.

8. The conclusion statement should be comprehensive. Kindly revise it.

9. The introduction looks lengthy and some of the statements are repeated, which should be avoided.

10. Also, include the detailed procedure for Total N determination.

Reviewer #2: MS Title: Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable production

General comments

This manuscript addresses an important issue by processing the waste pine needles and sugarcane bagasse along with farmyard manure to develop soilless potting media. Experiments are conducted appropriately, However, The manuscript lacks explicit presentation of control data for each experiment conducted by the authors. It is imperative to include control conditions where no organic matter was added to the soil to facilitate meaningful comparisons across different treatments. In order for the manuscript to undergo thorough review, it is essential that control data be provided for comparison. Without such data, meaningful evaluation of the experiments conducted would be compromised.

**********

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: Yes: Babar Iqbal

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.

PLoS One. 2024 Jun 11;19(6):e0302135. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302135.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


13 Mar 2024

Response to Reviewers’ Comments

Reference: PONE-D-24-02845

Title: Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable production

NOTE: Revised/added text as per review comments has been highlighted in the revised manuscript through track changes.

Authors acknowledge the comments by respectable reviewers and editor to improve the quality of the manuscript. Thank you very much for these efforts and for sparing valuable time.

Reviewer #1:

Query 1. I suggest the author remove abbreviated words from the abstract and revise it. Kindly use full names here.

Response: The abbreviation from the abstract has been removed and revised with full names as suggested.

Query 2. Line 37-40: Kindly revise it. I found some inconsistencies in these sentences.

Response: Sentences have been revised.

Query 3. I suggest the author revise the keywords and it should be not the same as the title of the manuscript.

Response: Needful has been done.

Query 4. Line 81: Do not start the sentence with the reference. It looks awkward and not according to scientific standards.

Response: Suggestion incorporated.

Query 5. At least mention three objectives and hypotheses of your current research and correlate them with the discussion section.

Response: Objectives and hypotheses of research have been included in the last paragraph of the introduction.

Query 6. Check the references in the text and the reference section. Make sure it should be according to the journal format.

Response: Needful has been done.

Query 7. I suggest you some new references related to your study. Kindly cite them in your research article which will increase the worth of your article.

Response: Suggestion incorporated.

Query 8. The conclusion statement should be comprehensive. Kindly revise it.

Response: Conclusion statement has been revised as per suggestion.

Query 9. The introduction looks lengthy and some of the statements are repeated, which should be avoided.

Response: Needful has been done throughout the introduction as per suggestion.

Query 10. Also, include the detailed procedure for Total N determination.

Response: A detailed procedure of total N determination has been added under the heading of chemical analysis in detail.

Reviewer #2:

Query 1. The manuscript lacks explicit presentation of control data for each experiment conducted by the authors. It is imperative to include control conditions where no organic matter was added to the soil to facilitate meaningful comparisons across different treatments. In order for the manuscript to undergo thorough review, it is essential that control data be provided for comparison. Without such data, meaningful evaluation of the experiments conducted would be compromised.

Response: We appreciate your insightful comments. Since our experimental setup was soilless, it may not be appropriate to include a soil control. Therefore, we compared the available organic residues (FM, PN, and SB) in all possible combinations to fulfill the requirement for a baseline comparison. Thank you for highlighting the significance of control data. We are dedicated to offering pertinent and enlightening data to support a comprehensive assessment of the paper.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0302135.s001.docx (20.3KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

20 Mar 2024

PONE-D-24-02845R1Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable productionPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Alam, 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 May 04 2024 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,

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

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:

Please focus on reviewer comments about figures.

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

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

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

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

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: 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

Reviewer #3: 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

Reviewer #3: 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: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Your efforts in refining the manuscript have been duly recognized.

I suggest you consider incorporating more figures than tables into your manuscript. Figures not only enhance the visual appeal of your paper but also provide a succinct and informative way to present your findings. I suggest labeling the figures as "Fig. 1a, 1b, etc. for each type of parametrs" for clarity and consistency throughout the document. Additionally, I encourage you to include a study area figure in your paper. This section will provide essential context for your research, helping readers better understand the geographical or thematic scope of your study.

**********

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

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.

PLoS One. 2024 Jun 11;19(6):e0302135. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302135.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


22 Mar 2024

Response to Reviewers’ Comments

Reference: PONE-D-24-02845R1

Title: Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable production

NOTE: Revised text as per review comments has been highlighted in the revised manuscript through track changes.

The authors sincerely appreciate the insightful comments provided by the esteemed editor and reviewers, which have greatly contributed to enhancing the quality of the manuscript. We are grateful for their valuable time and efforts dedicated to the review process. Thank you.

Reviewer #3:

Query. I suggest you consider incorporating more figures than tables into your manuscript. Figures not only enhance the visual appeal of your paper but also provide a succinct and informative way to present your findings. Additionally, I encourage you to include a study area figure in your paper.

Response: As per the suggestion of the respected reviewer Table 1 titled “Effect of substrate composition on spinach growth and yield attributes” (Plant height (cm), Fresh biomass (g plant−1), Dry biomass (g plant−1), Leaves plant−1) has been converted into figures to enhance the visual appeal. Moreover, the study area information has been provided in the materials and methods section (2.1. Site description), and the study area figure has been provided in Fig 1.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0302135.s002.docx (18.9KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

28 Mar 2024

Utilization of organic-residues as potting media: Physico-chemical characteristics and their influence on vegetable production

PONE-D-24-02845R2

Dear authors,

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. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Dear authors,

I have gone through your manuscript in response to the reviewers' comments. After carefully reviewing the revisions made based on the reviewers' comments, I am pleased to say that your paper has met the standards and requirements for publication. The revisions addressed the concerns raised by the reviewers effectively, enhancing the clarity, coherence, and overall quality of the manuscript.

I am writing to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

21 May 2024

PONE-D-24-02845R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Alam,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, 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 customercare@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

Taimoor Hassan Farooq

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0302135.s001.docx (20.3KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0302135.s002.docx (18.9KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES