Different Drought Tolerance Strategy of Wheat Varieties in Spike Architecture

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Different Drought Tolerance Strategy of Wheat Varieties in  Spike Architecture

 

The authors carried out a study on the behavior of different varieties of wheat, in two very different areas in terms of soil and fertilization. The work is interesting in a context of climate change where droughts are expected to be more and more frequent.

 

The main problem is that the authors present their results in a very brief way. Although their conclusions are based on differences in drought between early and late varieties, the results do not delve into these data. There are several contradictory phrases between the results and the discussion, and there is a lack of correlation between these results and the conclusions. They must detail how each variety behaved in Field 1 and in Field 2, in which varieties the number of spikes, the density, the size of the grains, etc., increase or decrease in each growing periode. Since the two areas were very different, comparisons should be made between the two growing seasons, since the former seems to have been less dry than the latter. In this way, the researchers may reduce the number of variables affecting their results and focus only in water stress. Since Field 2 is less fertile, highlight which would be the ideal variety to grow on this site.

 

See also the coments in the attached document

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank You, the anonymous reviewer, for taking the time to assess our manuscript and for Your helpful and constructive comments.

We addressed all comments, which helped to improve the manuscript further and remove inconsistencies. We believe that these revisions lead to a significantly improved manuscript.

We agree with the brief results description which is not desired and currently, we are working on this section to be improved and more connected with the discussion section. We are focusing on the detailed description of the differences among the varieties and also on the different responses of each variety to both locations. We also agree with the other corrections suggested in the attached article in pdf. 

Again, thank you very much for Your time.

Best regards,

Nicole Frantová on behalf of the co-authors

Reviewer 2 Report

The article entitled “Different Drought Tolerance Strategy of Wheat Varieties in 2 Spike Architecture” is an original research article. The authors did great work, and the paper is one of the core articles in the field.

Criteria for the topic selection and research are well done.

The article will contribute to the sciences as well.

The method is new.

 

I want to suggest that the authors focus more on the article's discussion section to validate the results with the previously published literature. And focus more on the comparative discussion. This section of the manuscript is quite short, and the article's meaning is not fulfilled. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, 

Thank You, the anonymous reviewer, for taking the time to assess our manuscript and for Your helpful and constructive comments.

We addressed all comments, which helped to improve the manuscript further and remove inconsistencies. We believe that these revisions lead to a significantly improved manuscript.

Currently, we are focusing on the change of the Results and Discussion section, to make it more detailed and focused on each variety and its response in spike architecture to the locations.

Again, we thank You for Your time.

Best regards,

Nicole Frantová on behalf of the co-authors

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

thank you for your corrections, the text and the results presentation have been considerably improved. Just some observations that I hope will complete the paper:

 

Table 2. One more row to indicate flowering and ripening

 

L200 If Bohemia variety may cause a biass in statistical análisis, why not to remove it and check what happens?

 

L207 Table 1. Descriptives data of the observed traits and statistical significance of nonparametric ANOVA analyses

 

Revise table number 3

I can´t see the red cells…..

 

L214, In Fig 2 you can use “a” and “b” on the bars to indicate if Balitus yield compared to Bohemia yields are statistically different or not. An “a” on both bars means statistically equal yields. A “a” on one bar and a “b” on the other mean statistically different yields. The use of “a” and “b” to indicate alleles should be avoided. You could use Ppd-D1a or b

 

L248 I´m not sure to understand this sentence

 

 

L412 revise this sentence

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx