Genetic Diversity Analysis and Potential Distribution Prediction of Sophora moorcroftiana Endemic to Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I appreciate the authors diligence in working through many of the suggested revisions. However, I still struggle with the overall objective of the paper. It is clear that there is some population genetic structure, in S. moorcroftiana and that this structure is associated with altitude rather than other climatic factors (results from the redundancy analysis).  Additionally, the climatic niche modeling provides some evidence for the past and future distributions of the species. Though the link to the population genetic variation isn't made clear.

I just find it difficult to see the link between the geographic and population genetic patterns in the study.

The manuscript also lacks a logical flow and the transitions between ideas can be a little disjunct. Although the methods and results sections have been expanded there are quite a few confusing or awkward sentences.

One area that needs more work is the discussion. How do the results of this study compare to other studies of similar species? Do you find the same types of patterns?

Also, the revised manuscript has pivoted away from discussing the impacts of the longitudinal transect in the south-central portion of the Tibetan Plateau following the Yarlung Zangbo river. The original variation in heterozygosity was thought to be associated with the position along the river. Is this no longer important to the study?

In summary, in its current state the manuscript still lacks clarity.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

All comments were replied.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for taking the time to provide valuable suggestions for the revision of this manuscript. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presents the potential distribution prediction of Sophora moorcroftiana (Benth.) Baker based on 19 bioclimatic factors using MaxEnt modeling. Additionally, the analysis was supported by results of population genetic diversity results using 20 polymorphic SSR markers.
The species is an endemic woody plant distributed in Qinghai–Tibet Plateau (QTP) high elevations, characterised by cold weather requirements.
In front of expected climate changes towards a higher average year temperature, the endemic character of the species is the real threat to its preservation.

The research pattern of the paper is clear and typical to scientific data elaboration.
The conclusions were logically derived on the basis of obtaining data of results as well as discussion of relevant scientific literature.
The paper touches on the important problem of climate change in the context of species preservation. The authors pointed that the results could be the theoretical basis for the development of germplasm conservation strategies, which are very important tools in-exitu protection of many species. The knowledge of genetic variation and differentiation of the species is very crucial, especially in the case of the species characterised by low values of genetic parameters.

I appreciate the effort of the authors to re-write the paper regarding my former comments and to submit it in a clear and logical version.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for taking the time to provide valuable suggestions for the revision of this manuscript. 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for your continued work to improve and clarify your manuscript.

Overall, I think that you have an important story that needs to be told. My hope is that the improved manuscript will provide some insight into the conservation and protection of the endemic Sophora moorcroftiana.

The approaches and results are sound. I would ask that you take one last look at the manuscript to catch awkward sentences and phrases that are found throughout.

For example. the very first sentence in the manuscript states that “Global climate has been continuously developing for nearly 100 years.” Do you think that climate was not continuously “developing” prior to 1921? While I understand the point your making, I do think it is important to be clear and precise with your words. It will help the reader and make your paper much stronger. There are other examples throughout.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx