The Assessment of Morphological Diversity of Colchicum luteum L., an Economically Important Threatened Medicinal Plant of Kashmir Himalaya

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article entitled: "The Assessment of Morphological Diversity of Colchicum luteum L. An Economically Important Threatened Medicinal Plant of Kashmir Himalaya" deals with an important issue regarding the conservation of an endangered plant species. This paper will be able to help draw valuable attention to this important problem of medicinal plant extinction. In general, the problematics are well elaborated and the study was well conducted. However, there are a number of technical errors as well as English language mistakes that need to be corrected.

There are a few suggestions regarding the manuscript:

1. In abstract keywords, please use Endangered species instead of Endangered;
2. In Material and Methods, row 128: It is better to use the word "selected" instead of "chosen". On what principle were these plants selected?
3. In Results and Discussion, Figure 4: This figure is not clear enough to read. Please change it.
4. In References: There are some technical errors that need to be corrected according to reference style.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to Reviewer’s Comments

Dear Editor,

We are very thankful to the editor and reviewers for the encouraging, critical and constructive comments on the submitted manuscript. The comments have been very thorough and useful in improving the manuscript and for the benefit of the editors. We strongly believe that the comments and suggestions have increased the scientific value of revised manuscript by many folds. We have taken care of every raised concern of the editor and reviewers and address the all-grammatical errors, authors have gone through the manuscript thoroughly and taken the help from a native English-speaking mentor in this regard and in the manuscript we tried our best to address every one of them in the present revised form of the manuscript. The manuscript has been revised as per the comments given by the Editor and reviewers, and our responses to all the comments are as follows:

Reviewer #1:

Comments

 

Pont 1: In abstract keywords, please use endangered species instead of Endangered;

Response: We have done the needful.

Pont 2: In Material and Methods, row 128: It is better to use the word "selected" instead of "chosen". On what principle were these plants selected?

Response: Justified. We have done the needful. Plants were selected on the morphological features like plant height, leaf area, number of seeds per plant, come length/width etc..As mentioned full detail methodology

Pont 3: In Results and Discussion, Figure 4: This figure is not clear enough to read. Please change it.

Response: Justified. We have done the needful, we can put Table 5 or figure 4 in the text, because both represents same meaning in the paper), so no need to have figure 4 in the manuscript text.

             Pont 3:   In References: There are some technical errors that need to be corrected according to    reference style.

Response:  Thank you so much for your suggestion. Yes, we have modified the reference Section.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

latin  names and spell should be  check

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to Reviewer’s Comments

Dear Editor,

We are very thankful to the editor and reviewers for the encouraging, critical and constructive comments on the submitted manuscript. The comments have been very thorough and useful in improving the manuscript and for the benefit of the editors. We strongly believe that the comments and suggestions have increased the scientific value of revised manuscript by many folds. We have taken care of every raised concern of the editor and reviewers and address the all-grammatical errors, authors have gone through the manuscript thoroughly and taken the help from a native English-speaking mentor in this regard and in the manuscript we tried our best to address every one of them in the present revised form of the manuscript. The manuscript has been revised as per the comments given by the Editor and reviewers, and our responses to all the comments are as follows:

Reviewer #2:

Comments

 

Pont 1: Latin  names and spell should be  check

Response: Thank you so much for your suggestion, we have done the needful.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx