Improvements in Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) Varieties and Parent Traceability Analysis in Yunnan, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript reported the agronomic and industrial traits of sugarcane varieties released from 1952-2020 in Yunnan and parents of the varieties., and discussed the direction of sugarcane improvement in Yunnan. 

The author discussed the sugarcane production all over Yunnan, however, they evaluated only one environment and no replication of year in each crop type. Yunnan province is large area and there should be G x E in varieties. So, the author should be mentioned that why this experiment is enough for this discussion.

Furthermore, the author showed the parents of varieties but not show the inbreeding coefficient to evaluate genetic variation of the varieties. I think if the author show inbreeding coefficient should be better for the discussion.

Author Response

Responses to Reviewer 1 Comments

Comments 1:

1. The author discussed the sugarcane production all over Yunnan, however, they evaluated only one environment and no replication of year in each crop type. Yunnan province is large area and there should be G×E in varieties. So, the author should be mentioned that why this experiment is enough for this discussion.

 

We appreciate the helpful suggestions. Here are our responses:

 

1.1 Characterized as C4 plant, sugarcane is a perennial crop. Usually, it can be harvested for 4 to 6 times or even more during the growing stage. In 1^st year, we use sugarcane buds to generate the new plant and the stage calls New Plant. In 2^nd year, sugarcane stems developed from the remained roots of 1^st year were harvested and we call the stage Ratoon 1. After harvesting the sugarcane of Ratoon 1, the left root in the soil will grow up and the stems would be gathered, which we called Ratoon 2. In this experiment, we collected the data of characteristics for 3 years, including New Plant, Ratoon 1 and Ratoon 2, which are 3 replications of year.

 

1.2 Before the experiment, we put G×E interaction in consideration for the design. However, based on the following reasons, only one suitable plot was adopted.

1.2.1 As descriptions in the manuscript, we sampled a large number of materials, which needed to be treated by professionals and special equipment. Only Kaiyuan (the location of our institute) can meet our demands and the conditions of other places are limited.

1.2.2 Previous researches have documented that the main sugarcane producing areas in Yunnan, like Baoshao, Dehong, Lincang and Kaiyuan, possess the similar environmental and climatic characteristics. Furthermore, based on the research applied in the places mentioned above (Luo J., et al., 2015) ，G×E interaction showed no significance.

1.2.3 Our manuscript provides valuable information about the degradation of sugarcane varieties mainly caused by diseases, like sugarcane smut, mosaic disease, brown rust disease, spot disease and so on. Kaiyuan, as the main sugarcane breeding region in Yunnan, where the local climate is characterized as high humidity and temperature and this characteristics would contribute to the high rates of diseases. So, we think Kaiyuan could be served as the ideal research plot for our experiment.

 

 

Comments 2:

Furthermore, the author showed the parents of varieties but not show the inbreeding coefficient to evaluate genetic variation of the varieties. I think if the author show inbreeding coefficient should be better for the discussion.

 

Thank you for point this out. Here are our responses:

The genetic researches showed that the genetic background of modern sugarcane is similar, which is a general consensus. As discussed in our manuscript, foreign germplasm resources have played an important role in the cultivation of new sugarcane varieties in China, and according to incomplete statistics, from 1950 to 2000, 163 varieties were bred from 21 parents including CP, F and Co series, that accounting for 87.63% of the counted varieties and showing the high inbreeding coefficient. In addition, the research did in our research team showed that the genetic similarity coefficient among 98 varieties ranged from 0.73 to 0.75, and the highest value achieved to 0.93 (Zan et al., 2015). There are also many similar studies, which were cited in our manuscript, showing the higher inbreeding coefficient. Therefore, there is no associated results in the manuscript.

 

Reference

Luo J., Xu L.,Qiu J., Zhang H.,Yuan Z.,Deng Z.,Chen R.,Que Y. Evaluation of sugarcane test and ecological zone division in China based on HA-GGE Biplot(2015). Crop Journal, 41(02):214-227.

Zan F., Ying X., Wu., Zhao P., Chen X., Ma L., Su H., Liu J. Genetic diversity analysis of 98 collections of sugarcane germplasm with AFLP markers. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015,48(05):1002-1010.

Reviewer 2 Report

The work has scientific merit for publication.
Adjustments are needed.
Some issues mainly in methodology need to be clarified.

 Some terms are overused in the text and need to be replaced.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to Reviewer Comments

 

 

Comment 1

Some issues mainly in methodology need to be clarified.

 

Response 1:

We thank for your useful advice. Here are some major responses:

1.1 We added the information about how the sugarcane breeders were distributed in each characteristic and replication in line 134-135.

1.2 We have added the methodology applied with reference and the units for each characteristic in line 154-161.

1.3 Followed the suggestions of statistic part, we added more details in line 181-184.

1.4 The other detailed responses, please check Table 1.

 

Table 1. All responses to Reviewer 2

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors	Line number	Authors' Reply	Modified line number
a question: these series are mentioned in Table 1?	84	21 parents including CP F and Co series were not mentioned in Table 1. Table 1 mainly included the information of test varieties and these test varieties was mainly of the 163 varieties were bred from 21 parents.
in the same year? December, 2016?	122	Added the world “next 3 years”	128
Indicate the year!	127	Had indicate the year in the document	132, 133
How the sugarcane breeders were distributed in the each trait and replication? This aspect in most important to reduced the interferences on the variation coefficient for statistical analysis!	128	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	134, 135
These grades were based on the anterior studies? Please, indicate the author (s) if possible!	132	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	139, 140
Some terms are overused in the text and need to be replaced.	142	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	153
Indicate the methodology applied with reference and add the units for each characteristic	143	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	154-161
Add information about the test, and other statistical tool applied for example" the arcane process  then all data were normalized " mentioned at  Figure 1; Kruskal -Wallis...etc	165	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	181-184
include .... difference between the varieties for......	169	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	189-191
characteristics in 107 sugarcane varieties	173	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	204
group 2: ........, group 3: ......	184	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	214,215
cluster variety groups	203	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	252
characteristics between the four cluster variety groups	209	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	261
substitute by significant role	229	Authors improved it according to the expert opinions and modifies it in the text. See the uploaded text for details.	282
substitute the "increase" term by other.....	253	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	308
substitute the "increase" term by other.....	256	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	311
substitute the "increase" term by other.....	257	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	312
substitute the "increase" term by other.....	259	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	314
substitute the "increase" term by other.....	260	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	315

 

 

 

Comment 2

Some terms are overused in the text and need to be replaced.

The detailed responses please check Table 2.

 

Table 2 All responses to Reviewer 2

Comments and Suggestions for Authors	Line number	Authors' Reply	Modified line number
Some terms are overused in the text and need to be replaced.	8	Deleted “Correspondence:”	8
	13	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	13
	21	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	21
	37	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	37
	66	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	66
	75	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	75
	122	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	128
	124	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	130
	131	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	139
	139	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	150
	168	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	188
	169	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	189
	Table 3	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	Table 3
	174	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	205
	176	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	207
	179	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	210
	Table 4	Add “%”. See the uploaded text for details.	Table 4
	182	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	213
	188	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	233
	189	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	234
	191	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	236
	192	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	237
	201	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	250
	231	Deleted “played”	283
	245	“revealed” substituted by “showed”	300
	247	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	302
	249	“revealed” substituted by “indicated”	304
	253	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	308
	255	“revealed” substituted by “showed”	310
	256	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	311
	257	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	312
	259	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	314
	260	substitute the "increase" term by “advance”	315
	266	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	321
	270	“traits” substituted by “characteristics”	325
	312	“no” substituted by “not”	379
	347	“alter” substituted by “change”	415
	348	“in” substituted by “considering”	416

 

 

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The answers of authors to my comments are acceptable.  However, if previous research (Luo J., et al., 2015) mentioned no G×E interaction among the main sugarcane producing areas in Yunnan, the author should note that results in the "materials and methods" or "discussion".

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx