Regulation of 5-Aminolevunilic Acid and Its Application in Agroforestry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript does not appear to be ready for publication.

The abstract is too short and does not reflect the review study that was conducted. The highlights of the review are not visible in the abstract.

Lines14-21; what part is it? why is there that section?

Provide the CAS/PubChem CID number for ALA.

What are figures 1 and 2 made of? what software? or citing from other publications?

As a review paper, a minimum of 4 pictures and/or tables is highly recommended.

Overlapping text is okay; i tested it with turnitin and it was tolerable.

Can ALA be applied to all plants? or only certain plants? it should be discussed further.

Is ALA safe long term? is that no mutation it would cause? Future directions and implication sections are urgently needed for this manuscript.

The conclusion section should be provided separately.

There is no big problem in english, but re-checking for grammar and spelling is needed. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The current review is well done, but needs some adjustments as the following:

-          Review needs some writing adjustments (grammar, capital and small letters, spaces, super- and sub-script).

-          Abstract is powerless.

-          Line 16, VB12, clarify what is this abbreviation for the first time and write it in a complete form then add its abbreviation in the rest of review. Apply this note inside the review.

-          Line 325, transfer number of reference beside the author Hotta et al.

-          Part 4.4.4.3. salt stress, you can support your review and cite the following articles: (https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/11/7/428/htm )

-          Part 4.4.4.3. water stress, you can support your review and cite the following articles: (https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/3/587 ) & (https://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/11/9/1219 )

-            

Review needs some writing adjustments (grammar, capital and small letters, spaces, super- and sub-script).

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Ref: MS “Regulation of 5-Aminolevunilic Acid and Its Application in Agroforestry”. The manuscript is a well written review article regarding the potential and practical applications of 5-Aminolevunilic Acid in agroforestry. I have some comments and suggestions. I am not satisfied with the abstract. Please thoroughly rewrite the abstract. I also suggest incorporating the introduction as a separate section to summarize the background information about the theme of the manuscript. The heading extreme temperature stresses is not appropriate. I suggest separation of this heading into chilling and high temperature stress. Also, the heading water stresses is also confusing. It should be divided into drought and water logging stress if literature is available about it. ALA plays critical role in chlorophyll and heme synthesis. The information about these aspects needs supplementation to improve the significance of the review article. The review article should also contain a summarized table. Therefore, please include a table regarding the potential effects of ALA in the manuscript.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The review includes many informations of 5-aminolevunilic acid, and I think it need minor revision.

 

1. Please follow the reference format of MDPI, and superscript is not necessary. Many abbreviations are included in the manuscript. The authors may consider to have an ‘abbreviation’ section.

 

2. Page 1, line 6: Please provide Department of XX in from of College of Horticulture.

 

3. Page 1, line 16: VB12 is an informal abbreviation. It is better to use vitamin B12.

 

4. Page 2, line 42: What is ‘accumulation of 0.565-0.689’?

 

5. Page 2, lines 55-57: Generally, the …..1999/45EC. Please provide reference.

 

6. Page 3, line 142: Extracting references from previous studies. This sentence should be rewrite.

 

7. Page 3, line 94: Arabidopsis should be italic like page 10, line 460.

 

8. Page 3, line 95: In TAIR database, there are three HemA genes, namely HemA1, HemA2, and HemA3. Are they all actve GluTR?

 

9. Page 3, line 119: S. Arizona should be replaced by S. arizona.

 

10. Page 4, lines 153-154: tetraprryol, typo?

 

11. Page 7, line 310 & line 321: the authors use ABA at line 310, but give the full name at line 321. It is better to give the full name and abbreviation together at first appear.

 

12. Reference section: from reference 100 (page 23) to reference 266 (page 30), numbering is duplicate.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The introduction is very short, and failure to synthesize the introduction will make it difficult for the reader to fully understand the purpose of reviewing this article.

Conclusions should be given in the revised version, considering that a review must have a conclusion that highlights the findings in the literature study.

Author Response

Q: The introduction is very short, and failure to synthesize the introduction will make it difficult for the reader to fully understand the purpose of reviewing this article.

A: Yes, we have added content in Introduction section in the thrid version of MS.

Q: Conclusions should be given in the revised version, considering that a review must have a conclusion that highlights the findings in the literature study.

A: Yes, we have added the  Conclusion section in the thrid version of MS.