Effects of the Source–Sink Relationship on Walnut Nut Quality at the Scale of the Fruit–Bearing Branch

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

The subject of the manuscript is topical, very significant and interesting.

The present study evaluate the nut quality, physiological and biochemical indexes of leaves, and microstructure of leaves and fruit stalks at various leaf-to-fruit ratios to gain insight into the relationships between branch agronomic traits and nut quality.

The length, quality and language of the paper are adequate. The used methods are accurate. The results are clearly presented.

I have only one recommendation to authors: please improve the conclusion of the manuscript and check the text for technical errors.

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Re: Manuscript reference No. forests-1741953

We would like to thank you for your valuable comments on the manuscript and affirmation.We would also like to express once again our sincere gratitude for the time and effort you have spent on the manuscript.

Point-to-Point Response to Reviewers’ Comments

Point 1: I have only one recommendation to authors: please improve the conclusion of the manuscript and check the text for technical errors.

Response 1: We have reviewed the article again, revised the wrong statements and non-standard writing, and improved the conclusion of the article. Modifications are as follows.

1. We have checked the cancellation of word hyphenation to ensure the integrity of the words at the end of the line. Therefore, the line number of this article changed, which brings inconvenience to reading the article.
2. Line 14: Juglans regia was italicized,  Juglans regia was modified to “Juglans regia”.
3. Line 89: “fruit-fruiting” was modified to “fruit-bearing”.
4. Line 172: After crude fat we added ”and”.
5. Line 292-293: The upper case icon in picture 2 was changed to lower case.
6. Line 319: “more” was modified to “less”.
7. Line 331:”P” was italicized, ”P” was modified to “P”.
8. Line 345: Revise ”The sentence, increasing NPCL and FSD can increase average dry weight, transverse diameter, kernel dry weight of fruits, and soluble protein content, and decrease starch content (Figure 4g, h, i, j, k)” to ” Increasing NPCL and FSD can increase average dry weight, transverse diameter, and kernel dry weight of fruits (Figure 4g, h, j)”.
9. Line 363: Revise “chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics” to “chlorophyll characteristics”.
10. Line 378-379: We added a lowercase icon to Figure 5.
11. Line 494: After 1NPCL:(2-3) NF we added ” (hypothesis 4)”.
12. Line 535: “NPCL” and “NF” were italicized. “NPCL” and “NF” were modified to “NPCL” and “NF”,
13. Line 551: “1” was modified to “2”.
14. Line 598: We have completed the revision of the conclusions in the article with more in-depth consideration of the findings and questions. Modifications are as follows. In terms of proposed questions, the study results allow us to state that fruit-bearing branch agronomic traits regulate walnut nut quality and that uneven fruit size is associated with source-sink imbalance. On the one hand, the main target agronomic characters affecting fruit and the range of leaf fruit ratio in line with agriculture is determined, which provides basic data for improving fruit quality from the aspect of optimizing agronomic characters. On the other hand, supporting the hypothesis that fruit quality is comprehensively regulated by carbohydrate assimilation, transport, and distribution, offers insights into the reasons why source-sink affects walnut fruit quality. Firstly, the photosynthetic capacity, carbohydrate transport capacity, and fruit quality of branches with more leaves and fruits were better than those with fewer. But, the regulation of leaf-to-fruit ratio on leaf photosynthetic capacity cannot be explained by the feedback hypothesis caused by the accumulation of non-structural carbohydrates in leaves, and that may be related to the fruit senescence and the regulation strategy of carbohydrate transport to the fruit with the growth period. Therefore, the regulation mechanism of leaf non-structural carbohydrates with fruit development on a time scale needs to be further ascertained. Secondly, only when the number of leaves was fewer, did the variation in fruit number significantly affect the inter-individual variability of fruit, and the fruit located at the top of the fruit stalk was better than the middle and bottom. Finally, among the three important agronomic traits affecting the fruit, the number of leaves and the diameter of the fruit stalk promoted the fruit quality, but the fruit number significantly reduced the fruit quality (especially when the number of leaves is low). Therefore, in agricultural production, an optimal range of leaf-to-fruit ratio should be encouraged if walnut cultivation is to improve. It appears that the physical quality of the fruit can be optimized by improving the agronomic traits of the fruiting shoots, thereby maximizing the transport of carbohydrates from the leaf to the fruit. In light of this, when the branches with one pinnate compound leaves, we could consider increasing the leaf area and retaining the fruit at the top of the stalk to improve the nut quality; with three and five, increasing the leaf area and branch diameter, seems to help improve both fruit yield and quality.

If there is still something wrong to modify the content, please inform you, and I will work harder to modify it. I sincerely thank you. I express my heartfelt gratitude for your care and patience. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is devoted to the study of the quality of walnut fruits depending on their location on the branches of different tiers. 

The authors investigated not only the biochemical characteristics of the walnut nut , but also carried out microscopy of the branches, and also determined the intensity of photosynthesis.

The set goals have been achieved, the applied methods are adequate.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Re: Manuscript reference No. forests-1741953

We would like to express our thanks to you for your work on our submission and for the revision comments. We would also like to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments on the manuscript. We have completed the revision of the comments of the other. Now we will report the following modification results to you, and invite you to review again. I express my heartfelt gratitude for your care and patience. 

Point-to-Point Response to Reviewers’ Comments

Point 1: I have only one recommendation to authors: please improve the conclusion of the manuscript and check the text for technical errors.

Response 1: We have reviewed the article again, revised the wrong statements and non-standard writing, and improved the conclusion of the article. Modifications are as follows.

1. We have checked the cancellation of word hyphenation to ensure the integrity of the words at the end of the line. Therefore, the line number of this article changed, which brings inconvenience to reading the article.
2. Line 14: Juglans regia was italicized,  Juglans regia was modified to “Juglans regia”.
3. Line 89: “fruit-fruiting” was modified to “fruit-bearing”.
4. Line 172: After crude fat we added ”and”.
5. Line 292-293: The upper case icon in picture 2 was changed to lower case.
6. Line 319: “more” was modified to “less”.
7. Line 331:”P” was italicized, ”P” was modified to “P”.
8. Line 345: Revise ”The sentence, increasing NPCL and FSD can increase average dry weight, transverse diameter, kernel dry weight of fruits, and soluble protein content, and decrease starch content (Figure 4g, h, i, j, k)” to ” Increasing NPCL and FSD can increase average dry weight, transverse diameter, and kernel dry weight of fruits (Figure 4g, h, j)”.
9. Line 363: Revise “chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics” to “chlorophyll characteristics”.
10. Line 378-379: We added a lowercase icon to Figure 5.
11. Line 494: After 1NPCL:(2-3) NF we added ” (hypothesis 4)”.
12. Line 535: “NPCL” and “NF” were italicized. “NPCL” and “NF” were modified to “NPCL” and “NF”,
13. Line 551: “1” was modified to “2”.
14. Line 598: We have completed the revision of the conclusions in the article with more in-depth consideration of the findings and questions. Modifications are as follows. In terms of proposed questions, the study results allow us to state that fruit-bearing branch agronomic traits regulate walnut nut quality and that uneven fruit size is associated with source-sink imbalance. On the one hand, the main target agronomic characters affecting fruit and the range of leaf fruit ratio in line with agriculture is determined, which provides basic data for improving fruit quality from the aspect of optimizing agronomic characters. On the other hand, supporting the hypothesis that fruit quality is comprehensively regulated by carbohydrate assimilation, transport, and distribution, offers insights into the reasons why source-sink affects walnut fruit quality. Firstly, the photosynthetic capacity, carbohydrate transport capacity, and fruit quality of branches with more leaves and fruits were better than those with fewer. But, the regulation of leaf-to-fruit ratio on leaf photosynthetic capacity cannot be explained by the feedback hypothesis caused by the accumulation of non-structural carbohydrates in leaves, and that may be related to the fruit senescence and the regulation strategy of carbohydrate transport to the fruit with the growth period. Therefore, the regulation mechanism of leaf non-structural carbohydrates with fruit development on a time scale needs to be further ascertained. Secondly, only when the number of leaves was fewer, did the variation in fruit number significantly affect the inter-individual variability of fruit, and the fruit located at the top of the fruit stalk was better than the middle and bottom. Finally, among the three important agronomic traits affecting the fruit, the number of leaves and the diameter of the fruit stalk promoted the fruit quality, but the fruit number significantly reduced the fruit quality (especially when the number of leaves is low). Therefore, in agricultural production, an optimal range of leaf-to-fruit ratio should be encouraged if walnut cultivation is to improve. It appears that the physical quality of the fruit can be optimized by improving the agronomic traits of the fruiting shoots, thereby maximizing the transport of carbohydrates from the leaf to the fruit. In light of this, when the branches with one pinnate compound leaves, we could consider increasing the leaf area and retaining the fruit at the top of the stalk to improve the nut quality; with three and five, increasing the leaf area and branch diameter, seems to help improve both fruit yield and quality.

If there is still something wrong to modify the content, please inform you, and I will work harder to modify it. I sincerely thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx