Functional Analysis of ScABI3 from Syntrichia caninervis Mitt. in Medicago sativa L.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors of the manuscript entitled "Functional analysis of ScABI3 from Syntrichia caninervis Mitt. in Medicago sativa L." presented an interesting work on the manipulation of alfalfa for advanced breeding. however, there are some points that need attention before the manuscript can be accepted for publication. 

1.  The manuscript must be checked thoroughly for English grammar and style. There are many sentences and expressions that need changes (e.g. lines 35-39, lines 40-41, line 48, line 56, line 58, e.t.c.). The introduction and discussion sections needs more attention 

2. The sentence in lines 70-76 is very big and needs reformatting

3. In line 86 define what plant the variety is

4. In paragraph 2.2, which are the primers for cDNA ScABI3 amplification and what are the cloning sites in pCAMBIA ?

5. For what genes the expression was tested by qRT-PCR? Elaborate in paragraph 2.3

6. In Figure 3, the expression levels of ABI3 were calculated with the ΔΔct method. Which sample was used as the baseline? the reviewer cannot understand the zero expression level of the WT

7. In line 305, what the authors mean by "‘Zhongmu No.1’ was selected as a genetically modified material" ? The variety was already modified (transgenic) or was used for transgenesis?

8. The conclusions paragraph needs attention. The authors should reformat the paragraph with improved English and grammar style 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

  Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Functional analysis of ScABI3 from Syntrichia caninervis Mitt. in Medicago sativa L.” (ID: agronomy-1878122). The comments and suggestions are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript, and they are significant guidance to our studies. We have made correction in accordance with the comments, and we hope that the revised manuscript meets the approval requirement of the journal. The revised contents are marked in red in the revised manuscript. The peer-to-peer responses to the reviewer's comments has been uploaded in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript from Zhang et al., reports that overexpression of ScABI3 from desiccation tolerant moss Syntrichia caninervis in alfalfa, significantly increased ABA content in transgenic lines. Furthermore, it also improves the photosynthetic efficiency and nutrition quality in transgenic lines.  Overall, this study will be a key foundation for subsequent studies on ScABI3 and other important genes from S. caninervis and other plants. This can also be used to improve the quality and traits of alfalfa by utilizing modern molecular breeding techniques. The experiments are well controlled and properly analyzed. The conclusions support the finding. I would recommend the article for publication with the following suggestion/question.

Mention the promoter used for generation of transgenic lines in alfalfa.

The naming of transgenic lines is confusing and inconsistent. The authors must retain a naming consistent with fig. 3

Arabidopsis ABI3 is mainly expressed during seed development. Did the authors determine the expression level of ScABI3 in different tissues? and does the overexpression of ScABI3 in alfalfa affects reproductive phase in any way? It would be useful to have a picture of a mature plant.

Line number 188- twelve (?)

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

  Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Functional analysis of ScABI3 from Syntrichia caninervis Mitt. in Medicago sativa L.” (ID: agronomy-1878122). The comments and suggestions are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript, and they are significant guidance to our studies. We have made correction in accordance with the comments, and we hope that the revised manuscript meets the approval requirement of the journal. The revised contents are marked in red in the revised manuscript. The peer-to-peer responses to the reviewer's comments has been uploaded in the attachment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx