OMICS in Fodder Crops: Applications, Challenges, and Prospects

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript reviews omics research in fodder crops, maize, sorghum, cowpea, alfalfa, and oat, in the last decade. With few review articles summarizing omics research in these fodder crops, this manuscript is useful to readers because it reviews many previous studies. In particular, I guess it increases the value that the article covers the research field of phenomics, and I do not see any major problems in the contents of each section. However, perhaps due to the shared authorship of each section, I feel that each is too independent of the other. For example, the explanation of GWAS appears several times in each section and seems redundant. These should be moved and explained efficiently in the introduction. In addition, authors should pay attention to the consistency of expression including word choice. Moreover, several references are not properly cited. For example, I guess the reference number #152 in L494 is not properly. It might be Jiao et al. Nature 2017 (10.1038/nature22971). And #135 in L638 is not a paper describing maize, it is about cowpea. #269 and #271 in L925. Please double-check the other cited papers.

 

Figure 1

Does it make sense that only Phenotyping has “High Throughput” while others are not? 

 

L71

It is possible to say “Handful of studies” from Figure 3? It is difficult to grasp whether it is more or less. I think it is necessary to add some data other than fodder crops and/or to make the graph starting from 2002 as Figure 4. In addition, it is necessary to explain how to count as Figure 4.

 

L164

QTN typo?

 

L244

For readability, the first HCN should be written as hydrogen cyanide.

 

L355

Omit studies.

 

L570

The first iTRAQ should be written as Isobaric Tag for Relative and Absolute Quantitation.

 

L833-837

Do you need any references here?

 

L918-922

Repeat

 

L918-L924

Compared to the transcriptome analysis in other sections, I feel that the descriptions are rough and less detailed. Can’t you describe a little more in consideration of the other sections?

 

L963

For readability, the first B should be written as Boron.

 

L980

HTP means High Throughput Phenotyping?

Author Response

We are highly thankful to the reviewer for providing us a chance to clarify the queries raised by him/her for improving this review article as per the standard of the reputed Journal of Current Issues in Molecular Biology. We are also thankful to the reviewer for devoted much time, and the inputs will definitely improve the quality of the article.  We hope  the reviewer will be satisfied with our inputs for each of your queries and all the necessary corrections provided in the revised manuscript. Please find the attached file for one-by-one response to the issues raised by you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript entitled “OMICS in Fodder Crops: Applications, Challenges, and Prospects” is a fine article prepared by the authors. It is well collated with facts and describes the in-depth about the application of multi-omics in improving the key fodder crop.

 The manuscript is worth publishing however a few minor comments can be addressed:

 1.    What is the data source of figure 3 about the publications on omics technologies?

2.    Figure 4: the author may provide the date of accessing the information

3.    Double brackets have been used in citing references at many occasions

4.    Since manuscript aims at discussing the improving the fodder crop using omics, how relevant it is to mention biofuel production

5.    Line 224: “ the relative changes of metabolites such as total carbohydrates, amides, and lipids were investigated in two sorghum genotypes.”

Can carbohydrates and lipids be considered as metabolites?

6.    Line 238 : The present study, word can be avoided when author is referring a citing document

7.    In many sections font color is different

8.    Line 467-489 , 648-663 : Keep font type and font size uniform

9.    Check the scientific name must be italicized thoroughly

10. While citing multiple reference, they can be kept in single bracket rather then bracketing them separately. Check journal’s guideline or any published article for reference.

Author Response

We are highly thankful to the reviewer for providing us a chance to clarify the queries raised by him/her for improving this review article as per the standard of the reputed Journal of Current Issues in Molecular Biology. We are also thankful to the reviewer for devoting much time, and the input will definitely improve the quality of the article.  We hope the reviewer will be satisfied with our inputs for each of your queries and all the necessary corrections provided in the revised manuscript. Please find the attached file for one-by-one response to the issues raised by you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

REPORT PDF

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We are highly thankful to the reviewer for providing us a chance to clarify the queries raised by him/her for improving this review article as per the standard of the reputed Journal of Current Issues in Molecular Biology. We are also thankful to the reviewer for devoting much time, and the input will definitely improve the quality of the article.  We hope the reviewer will be satisfied with our inputs for each of your queries and all the necessary corrections provided in the revised manuscript. Please find the attached file for one-by-one response to the issues raised by you

Author Response File: Author Response.docx