Peer Review Record

The manuscript is a review of nutrient management in dragon fruit production. Reviewers found the topic relevant and timely, given the growing commercial importance of the crop and the need for sustainable, region-appropriate nutrient management, and considered the manuscript generally well organised and easy to follow. However, major revision was required because the work read more as a compilation of recommendations than as a critical, evidence-based synthesis. Reviewers asked for a more concise title, an abstract that states the principal gaps and the review's distinct contribution, and a fuller Introduction covering the global and Indian production context, the evidence for adaptability and health claims, other farmer constraints, and the case for a dedicated review. They also asked for a methodology that reports search strings, dates, and data extraction, together with the handling of conflicting results and differing units. Many specific points concerned the fertiliser recommendations: stating whether P and K are expressed as elements or oxides, giving plant age, cultivar, soil, density, and trial duration for each rate, distinguishing yield from economic or quality optima, and clarifying age-wise recommendations. Further requests addressed the regional table for India (including the Keralam entry), the integrated nutrient management and nano-fertiliser sections, the structure of the conclusion and the placement of challenges and future directions, and consistent terminology, formatting, and language. The authors satisfactorily addressed all comments, after which the manuscript was accepted for publication.

Journal of Sustainable Technology in Agriculture (JOSTA) employs a double-anonymous peer review process. The identities of authors and reviewers remain mutually confidential throughout the review and publication process. Reviewer reports and correspondence are not published.

Voluntary reviewer disclosure. JOSTA respects reviewers' autonomy regarding attribution. A reviewer who wishes to be identified in the published article may notify the editorial office at any point before final acceptance. Upon written consent, the reviewer's name and affiliation will be acknowledged in the Publication & Reviewer Details section of the article. Reviewers who do not provide consent remain anonymous and are listed as Anonymous. This policy is strictly voluntary; no reviewer is under any obligation to disclose their identity.

This page provides a transparent summary of the editorial and peer-review process in accordance with JOSTA's open-science commitments. It does not constitute a full disclosure of reviewer comments or author responses.