The Growth and Physiological Responses of Gleditsia sinensis Lam. Seedlings with Different Phosphorus Efficiencies to Low Phosphorus Stress
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
Please find my comments in the attached file.
Regards
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsLu et al. studied the response of tolerant and sensitive Gleditsia sinensis seedlings to phosphorus deficiency. The manuscript is interesting and a lot of parameters were studied, including growth indicators, response of photosynthesis, enzyme activities, mineral element content, and phosphorus use efficiency. The results can be used in breeding for tolerance to low phosphorus stress. There are some comments.
“Phosphorus” appears very often in the text. It would probably be better to replace it with “P”.
The quality of the figures should be improved.
L. 57, 60, 539-542. References need to be added.
Subsection 2.1. How were G. sinensis genotypes screened for tolerance to low phosphorus stress?
L. 140. Please list the elements that have been analyzed.
Table 1. Please check the differences for LP/NP ratio (plant height): 0.96 b, 0.93 a, 0.86 a, 0.69 b.
L. 223-224. “The results of the root-shoot ratio indicate that G. sinensis responds to low phosphorus stress by increasing the root-shoot ratio.” An increase in the root-shoot ratio was observed only in the low phosphorus-tolerant family.
L. 585-590. “Farquhar et al. proposed the concept of “stomatological limitation analysis”…”. This concept is over 40 years old. Are there newer concepts known?
Figures. What does bars mean? SD or SE?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for taking my commenrs into account
Regards
Author Response
We greatly appreciate the reviewers and editor for their thorough review and valuable feedback on our manuscript. Your comments have been extremely helpful to our manuscript, so we have carefully read all the review comments and made comprehensive revisions to the manuscript.
