Melatonin Increases Drought Resistance through Regulating the Fine Root and Root Hair Morphology of Wheat Revealed with RhizoPot
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors, please see the attached pdf.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
The English is good in some sections, but needs an extensive editing to convey clearer statements and ideas. Special attention should be payed to the verb tenses and the use of informal words. Examples are provided in the comments in the attached pdf.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
Congrats for this research, I found it interesting and consistent in analysis. I can see that you worked hard to make the experiments and I appreciate the details regarding the cultivation conditions presented in the Material and Methods section. Also, The introduction is fine, reaching the important research area and the cited sources are relevant for this experiment.
But, the results are not presented clearly. There are a lot of grammatical and expression mistakes, especially when it comes to words and verbal tenses. Please fallow the recommendations written in the comments from the pdf attached.
The conclusion section, is very general, so, you can add a few things here.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
There are a lot of grammatical and expression mistakes, especially when it comes to words and verbal tenses. Please fallow the recommendations written in the comments from the pdf attached.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
agronomy-2457884
General comments
Authors investigated the effect of melatonin on wheat root systems in drought with the aim of increasing drought resistance. The experiment was carried out in the seedling stage, so the conclusion drawn for all growth stages is exaggerated. The annotation of the figures and the notations within the figure should be made consistent. I consider it necessary to edit the sentences, explain some of the statements and improve the English style.
Detailed comments
Latin name of the plant species should always be written in italics
71-74 lines: I don’t think this part necessarily needs to be here because you did not analyse the signalling pathway in your experiment.
89-90 line: the full names of the abbreviations RLs and RHs shall be written out the first time.
119-121 line: “There were. Melatonin solution…” this sentence is not clear. It needs to be checked.
146-147 line: Is it sure? Don’t think that soluble sugar kit determines the H2O2 or protein content?
150 line: in the title of Chapter 2.4 the sentence must be controlled
161 line: What does “area contour” mean? It should be explained.
203-204 line: MT treatment has been compared to what drought stress? The sentence needs to be clarified.
234-235 line: Do you mean that in DS treatment the length of stomatal guard cell decreased by 3.85% and the length of the stomatal aperture by 12.12% compared to CK? I think it is the other way around (see fig.4), it should be checked.
341 line: “the root system was gradually decline and fall”…For what treatment? You mean figure 8 shows the life span of root under DS treatment? Figure 8 needs more explanation.
In discussion 424-425 line: ..” did not significantly” what did it do? increase or decrease? Check the sentence.
In conclusion 489 line: What do you mean by “all growth stages”? The experiment was carried out up 30 days after sowing (see materials and methods) but was not analysed by plant growth stages. The sentence needs to be clarified.
Note to figures
Figure 2: letters A and B should be inserted into the figure if they are included in the comment below the figure. Similarly, the letters A,B,C etc. must be inserted in the parts of figure 3.
figure 4. The number of the stomatal guard cell length diagram (a) is written in the wrong place and the statistical difference is missing. It needs to be improved.
The font size under figure 4 in the comment is different from the other figures.
Some typos: 83 line. Tomography is correct, 264 line: H2O2 –bottom index should be 2.
English style needs improvement
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
The manuscript has greatly improved after the revision. Below I provide a few comments on minor details noticed in this version.
On line 127, I suggest to remove "to conduct", it is unnecessary here.
On line 142, I believe "seeding" is supposed to be "seedling".
The quality of the English Language has vastly improved after the revision. Minor details can be improved, but overall don't affect the comprehension of the text.
Author Response
Dear Editor and reviewer,
Thanks very much for your valuable comments. We have revised this manuscript point-by-point according to the reviewer’s comments. Please see the attachment.
1）We have removed "to conduct" in "Materials and Methods".
2) We have corrected "seeding" to be "seedling".
Best Wishes!
Dongxiao Li,
On behalf of all authors.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
