The Occurrence and Genetic Variability of Tea Plant Necrotic Ring Blotch Virus in Fujian Province, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors:

Tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus (TPNRBV) is a serious threat to tea cultivation, which is one of the most economically important plants in many Asian countries. Manuscript forests-2515267 (The occurrence and genetic variability of tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus in Fujian Province, China) provide a snapshot of the epidemiology (occurrence) and genetic structure of TPNRBV. These studies may be valuable in the management of this virus in tea cultivation. The research is interesting and thoroughly conducted.  The manuscript is also well written although a few minor changes in technical details should be considered to improve its overall quality. Some recommendations are included in the manuscript, and other suggestions were included below. 

 

-In abstract and introduction:

-How the authors consider that their findings could be valuable in the management and control of this virus in tea cultivation?

-Line 56 -57: This sentence could be considered part of the methodology. Include this information in the 2.1 section.

Comments:

In the introduction, the history of the disease and its classification were discussed. Minor details were suggested.

 

2. Materials and Methods

2.1

-In this section include the number of tea plant samples collected.

--In this epigraph described the TPNRBV symptoms, I am considered that symptoms of Figure S1 also could be associated to mixed infections which other viruses. Under field conditions would recommend testing for the presence/absence of other viruses. The High Throughput Sequencing could be useful.

-The authors could mention the type of sampling implemented, random plants, etc.

-Were collected only samples from symptomatic plants? The virus could be detected in asymptomatic plants? It would be an interesting aspect to consider in crop management.

Line 70: Li et al. [10]. / instead Li, et al. [10].

Lines 89-90: The file of sequences obtained in this study, GenBank accession numbers: OQ948425-OQ948464 could be included in supplementary material.

Comments:

The phylogenetic analysis implemented, and its respective parameters and analysis models are robust and suitable for the study. Minor details were suggested.

Results

No suggestions are made in this section.

Discussion

- In the discussion Epigraph, lines 235-238, the authors refer ´´ Fuzhou, Quanzhou, and Wuyishan may differ in terms of the tea cultivars they cultivate. It is plausible that different tea cultivars exhibit varying susceptibility to TPNRBV´´

-Considering this discussion, the authors should include the data, name of the sampled cultivars.

General conclusions

According to author results, the sequencing of 10 new TPNRBV isolates presented here significantly contributes to the understanding of the virus's population structure (lines 241-243). It would be interesting to include a sentence regarding the geographical structure according to its phylogeny, which is not mentioned in the manuscript. In conclusion section, the authors refer that ´´The data obtained here have significant implications for the management and control of TPNRBV´´. Could exemplify specifically according to the scope of your results.

Author Response

COMMENTS #1:

Tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus (TPNRBV) is a serious threat to tea cultivation, which is one of the most economically important plants in many Asian countries. Manuscript forests-2515267 (The occurrence and genetic variability of tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus in Fujian Province, China) provide a snapshot of the epidemiology (occurrence) and genetic structure of TPNRBV. These studies may be valuable in the management of this virus in tea cultivation. The research is interesting and thoroughly conducted.  The manuscript is also well written although a few minor changes in technical details should be considered to improve its overall quality. Some recommendations are included in the manuscript, and other suggestions were included below. 

RESPONSE: Thank you for your valuable comments and positive feedback on our research. We appreciate your recognition of the importance of studying Tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus (TPNRBV) in tea cultivation. We will carefully consider all your recommendations and suggestions to enhance the overall quality of the manuscript.

 

COMMENTS #2:

-In abstract and introduction:

-How the authors consider that their findings could be valuable in the management and control of this virus in tea cultivation?

RESPONSE: Thank you for raising this question. As mentioned in our manuscript, the current understanding of TPNRBV epidemiology and genetic variability is limited. Our survey of TPNRBV incidence in Fujian and the determination of ten complete genomes of this virus significantly enhanced our understanding in these aspects. This is valuable for implementing effective control measures, enabling the design of targeted strategies, and the development of accurate detection methods to combat TPNRBV. We have slightly modified the last sentence of the Abstract to make it clearer.

 

COMMENTS #3:

-Line 56 -57: This sentence could be considered part of the methodology. Include this information in the 2.1 section.

RESPONSE: As suggested by the reviewer, we have moved the sentence to the section of Materials and Methods in the revision.

 

COMMENTS #4:

In the introduction, the history of the disease and its classification were discussed. Minor details were suggested.

RESPONSE: In the revised manuscript, we have added a few more details about the disease in the introduction section.

 

COMMENTS #5:

2. Materials and Methods

2.1

-In this section include the number of tea plant samples collected.

RESPONSE: This has been done as suggested.

 

COMMENTS #6:

--In this epigraph described the TPNRBV symptoms, I am considered that symptoms of Figure S1 also could be associated to mixed infections which other viruses. Under field conditions would recommend testing for the presence/absence of other viruses. The High Throughput Sequencing could be useful.

RESPONSE: We acknowledge your perspective that these samples are infected by some other viruses. In fact, we have conducted high throughput sequencing and identified several different viruses in these samples. However, because the focus of this manuscript is on the occurrence and genetic variability of TPNRBV, we made the decision not to include these additional data. Nevertheless, we are committed to share these findings with readers in forthcoming publications.

 

COMMENTS #7:

-The authors could mention the type of sampling implemented, random plants, etc.

RESPONSE: Thank you for pointing this out. We have made revisions according to your suggestion.

 

COMMENTS #8:

-Were collected only samples from symptomatic plants? The virus could be detected in asymptomatic plants? It would be an interesting aspect to consider in crop management.

RESPONSE: All of our samples were obtained from symptomatic plants, but it is important to note that the observed symptoms vary significantly from sample to sample. We have not found any strict correlations between specific symptoms and the presence of TPNRBV. Consequently, we agree with you that this virus could potentially be present in asymptomatic plants as well. We will explore this possibility in our future studies. Thank you for this question.

COMMENTS #9:

Line 70: Li et al. [10]. / instead Li, et al. [10].

RESPONSE: Changed as suggested.

 

COMMENTS #10:

Lines 89-90: The file of sequences obtained in this study, GenBank accession numbers: OQ948425-OQ948464 could be included in supplementary material.

RESPONSE: Thank you for the suggestion. We have included the GenBank accession numbers (OQ948425-OQ948464) in the supplementary material as recommended (now presented as Table S2).

 

COMMENTS #11:

The phylogenetic analysis implemented, and its respective parameters and analysis models are robust and suitable for the study. Minor details were suggested.

RESPONSE: Thank you for recognizing the robustness and suitability of our phylogenetic analysis. We have made necessary revisions accordingly to improve the manuscript.

 

COMMENTS #12:

Results

No suggestions are made in this section.

Discussion

- In the discussion Epigraph, lines 235-238, the authors refer ´´ Fuzhou, Quanzhou, and Wuyishan may differ in terms of the tea cultivars they cultivate. It is plausible that different tea cultivars exhibit varying susceptibility to TPNRBV´´

-Considering this discussion, the authors should include the data, name of the sampled cultivars.

RESPONSE: Thank you for your thoughtful suggestions. We agree with you that different tea cultivars may exhibit varying susceptibility to TPNRBV. It is indeed well known that Fuzhou, Quanzhou, and Wuyishan cultivate different tea cultivars, each with a complex varietal composition. However, to avoid confusion and potential mistakes, we did not record the specific names of the cultivars in our samples.

 

COMMENTS #13:

General conclusions

According to author results, the sequencing of 10 new TPNRBV isolates presented here significantly contributes to the understanding of the virus's population structure (lines 241-243). It would be interesting to include a sentence regarding the geographical structure according to its phylogeny, which is not mentioned in the manuscript. In conclusion section, the authors refer that ´´The data obtained here have significant implications for the management and control of TPNRBV´´. Could exemplify specifically according to the scope of your results.

RESPONSE: Thank you for this valuable suggestion. We have included a sentence regarding the phytogeography of TPNRBV in the revised MS. In conclusion section, we have rephrased the sentences according to your suggestions.

Reviewer 2 Report

Chen et al. submitted a manuscript titled "The occurrence and genetic variability of tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus in Fujian Province, China" for publication in MDPI Forests.

The ms suits better in virology subject journal section, if not better in phylogeny journals. 

Fig. 2 titles are offset. 

Author Response

COMMENTS:

Chen et al. submitted a manuscript titled "The occurrence and genetic variability of tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus in Fujian Province, China" for publication in MDPI Forests.

The MS suits better in virology subject journal section, if not better in phylogeny journals. 

Fig. 2 titles are offset. 

RESPONSE: Thank you for your comment. We understand and appreciate your concern regarding the suitability of our manuscript for the journal Forestry. However, we believe there might be a misunderstanding about the journal's coverage. As evidence of the journal's interest in our research area, we would like to draw your attention to a previous relevant publication titled 'Quantitative distribution and transmission of tea plant necrotic ring blotch virus in Camellia sinensis' (Ren et al., 2022, 13(8), 1306), which was successfully featured in this journal. In addition, we have rectified the misalignment issue in revised Fig. 2.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

Although the purpose of the study was stated in the Introduction, it should also be stated why this study is needed. So was there such a problem in tea cultivation areas? It should also be stated in the same paragraph why this is needed.

 Although there is a figure showing the symptoms of the virus in the Supplementary File, the definition of these symptoms should be made in the result section of the text. At the same time, it was seen in the file that the symptoms were not very clear. In fact, since TPNRBV is a new virus, it is thought that it will be very beneficial for stakeholders to include clearer photos, especially in text.

In addition to these, I have shown some minor comments and suggestions about the manuscript on the paper. Please see them in the attached revised manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

-

Author Response

COMMENTS#1:

Although the purpose of the study was stated in the Introduction, it should also be stated why this study is needed. So was there such a problem in tea cultivation areas? It should also be stated in the same paragraph why this is needed.

 RESPONSE: Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have taken your suggestion into consideration and included a sentence that outlines the reasons for the importance of this study in the same paragraph.

COMMENTS#2:

Although there is a figure showing the symptoms of the virus in the Supplementary File, the definition of these symptoms should be made in the result section of the text. At the same time, it was seen in the file that the symptoms were not very clear. In fact, since TPNRBV is a new virus, it is thought that it will be very beneficial for stakeholders to include clearer photos, especially in text.

RESPONSE: We appreciate your feedback and share your concern regarding symptom definitions. However, due to the significant variability in symptoms among the TPNRBV-positive samples and the challenge of establishing a definitive link between specific symptoms and TPNRBV infection, we decided not to include symptom descriptions in the text. Nevertheless, we have taken your suggestion to heart and included a sentence in the revision to address this observation. Your input is valuable and has contributed to refining the presentation of our study. 

COMMENTS#3:

In addition to these, I have shown some minor comments and suggestions about the manuscript on the paper. Please see them in the attached revised manuscript.

RESPONSE: Thank you for taking the time to provide your valuable suggestions to improve our manuscript. We have reviewed your comments and carefully incorporated all of your suggestions into the revised version of the manuscript. Your contribution has been instrumental in improving the quality of our work, and we greatly appreciate your efforts in this regard.