Aromatic Terpenes and Their Biosynthesis in Dendrobium, and Conjecture on the Botanical Perfumer Mechanism

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In general, the manuscript was well presented. However, some minor revisions are needed.

Lines 54,58,117,120, 140, 141 dendrobium should be in italics

Line 114 D, loddigesii should be in italics

Line 263 change "didn't" to "did not"

Line 282 delete "Why would't a rose have a jasmine-like scent"

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Some minor revisions are needed as shown in previous section.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The "dendrobium" in the manuscript has been changed to italic. The rest of the content has been revised according to the issues you pointed out. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments

In general, the submitted manuscript is set out to assess the Aromatic terpenes and their biosynthesis in Dendrobium, and conjecture on the botanical perfumer mechanism. I trust that the manuscript has the potential to be published in CIMB. However, following are the poitns which need to be addressed before accetptance:

For instance,  all the figures are hardly readable and of low quality. It is mandatory to provide the high quality figures.

In the review article, the authors do not need to mention the discussion section separately. Nonetheless, it is very important to make the sequence for the better understanding.

Figure 5: Please always mention the reference.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:

 

Point 1: For instance, all the figures are hardly readable and of low quality. It is mandatory to provide the high quality figures.

Response 1: We have adjusted the images in the manuscript and ensured that they have a resolution of 600 dpi.

For Figure 1, we have adjusted the font and layout in it to make it easier to read.

For Figure 2, we have turned the colored text in the figure into black.

As for Figure 3, please allow me to explain to you that the very first version was more concise than the current one. However, the editors thought that the repetition rate of the explanation part of the noun abbreviation in the figure was too high, so we had to put the explanation of the noun abbreviation in the figure.

 Please see the attachment 

(The old version of Figure 3)

 

 

 

Point 2: In the review article, the authors do not need to mention the discussion section separately. Nonetheless, it is very important to make the sequence for the better understanding.

Response 2: It is true, as you said, that the discussion section should not be listed separately in the review.

However, after careful consideration, we felt that we should not split section 4 because the content of this section is logically linked. 4.1 pointed out that the dilemma of floral fragrance research lies in the lack of a key scientific issue; 4.2 presented the key scientific issue and conjecture; 4.3 gave an example of Dendrobium chrysotoxum. This is also corresponded to Figure 4.

We thought that perhaps the title” Discussion” was not appropriate for section 4, which is somewhat misleading, and we changed the title of the section to” Challenge and Opportunity”.

I wonder if this change will make you feel more appropriate?

 

Point 3: Figure 5: Please always mention the reference.

Response 3: We have included a citation in the title of Figure 5.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf