Antifungal and Allelopathic Effects of Essential Oil from Calyptranthes concinna DC. Dried Leaves and of Its Major Constituent Elemicin
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAntifungal and allelopathic effects of essential oil from Calyptranthes concinna DC. dried leaves and of its major constituent elemicin
General remarks:
First of all, the authors have a lot of papers on the topic of extracting essential oil, testing its composition and finally testing the antifungal effect in in vitro conditions, so the same methodology is mostly repeated in their papers.
Also, the extraction of essential oils from Calyptranthes concinna and the examination of their composition have also been published in several papers, so it does not represent an innovative segment.
Second, this paper in terms of aims and scope does not really fit this journal. Honestly, I was expecting at least some field trial (for allelopathic activity), considering that the authors sent the paper to the Agronomy journal however, everything ended with laboratory trials.
On the other hand, the paper is nicely written and overall I don't have many complaints. All objections are given below:
Specific remarks:
Page 2, Lines 63-65 - List the literature mentioned at the end of the sentence.
Page 4, Line 137 - Explain what PDA is. An abbreviation must be explained when it is mentioned for the first time in the text.
Also, clarify that the mentioned microorganisms were grown on that medium, so that it would be understandable to the reader.
Page 4, Line 140 - What plants were used? Explain the procedure of artificial inoculation of selected plants. Explain the method in detail.
Page 4, Line 145 - In reference 16, there is no method name "food poisoning technique". Explain the method.
Page 4, Line 165 - Why lettuce? Why was no weed plant used in the testing?
Page 7, Line 243 - The lowest concentration is not written in parentheses, although it is written that way in the text. Correct the text or value in parentheses.
Page 7, Line 244 - Not all are bold. A. nominus is not bolded in Table 3.
Page 7, Line 245 - A. flavus and not A. niger has a value greater than 90% in Table 3.
Also, add Aspergillus nomius because its value in Table 3 for elemicin concentration 0.4 mg/mL is greater than 90%.
Page 8, Lines 264-268 - L. sativa should be in italics.
General opinion:
Given that, according to the aims and scope, the topic presented in this paper is not in accordance with the journal, I suggest that the paper be forwarded to another MDPI journal that fits better.
Certainly, as far as the review procedure is concerned, I suggest that the paper be considered for publication after the proposed revision (but in a journal that is more suitable).
Best Regards,
Reviewer
Author Response
Uberlândia, July 9th, 2024, Brazil.
Prof. Dr. Leslie A. Weston
Editor of Agronomy
Dear Dr. Weston,
First of all, we would like to thank you for dealing with our manuscript submission. We are submitting a revised version of our research article entitled “Antifungal and allelopathic effects of essential oil from Calyptranthes concinna DC. dried leaves and of its major constituent elemicin” to be considered for publication in Agronomy. The reviewers’ suggestions and criticism have provided us with a unique opportunity to improve the quality of our manuscript. We would also like to thank them. As recommended, we have replied to all their questions (below). Corrections are indicated in red in the manuscript.
Reviewer #1:
- Page 2, Lines 63-65 - List the literature mentioned at the end of the sentence.
Answer: We believe no reference is needed since the sentence is our authorship. We reached this conclusion after carrying out the literature review. To write this sentence, the few published papers of the chemical composition and biological activities of C. concinna reinforce the importance of our study since it adds new information about the botanic species.
- Page 4, Line 137- Explain what PDA is. An abbreviation must be explained when it is mentioned for the first time in the text. Also, clarify that the mentioned microorganisms were grown on that medium, so that it would be understandable to the reader.
Answer: Detailed information was added to the text.
- Page 4, Line 140- What plants were used? Explain the procedure of artificial inoculation of selected plants. Explain the method in detail.
Answer: They were explained and plants were listed.
- Page 4, Line 145- In reference 16, there is no method name "food poisoning technique". Explain the method.
Answer: We apologize for using this term rather than “direct method”, the right term found in the literature [16]. The sentence was rewritten to become clear and objective.
- Page 4, Line 165- Why lettuce? Why was no weed plant used in the testing?
Answer: This issue is recurrent in research which focuses on allelopathic activity. Resistance or tolerance to secondary metabolites which work as allelochemicals is not specific. Mechanisms of actions are not totally clear, either. There are species that are more sensitive than others, such as Lactuca sativa (lettuce) and Lycopersicum esculentum (tomato); thus, they are often used in preliminary assays in laboratories. An updated publication shows that in vitro assays are usually mentioned by the literature and widely conducted by researchers worldwide. See: Mirmostafaee, S. et al. (2020). Study of Allelopathic Interaction of Essential Oils from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants on Seed Germination and Seedling Growth of Lettuce. Agronomy, 10, 163. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10020163
- Page 7, Line 243- The lowest concentration is not written in parentheses, although it is written that way in the text. Correct the text or value in parentheses.
Answer: It was corrected.
- Page 7, Line 244- Not all are bold. nominus is not bolded in Table 3.
Answer: A. nominus was written in bold.
- Page 7, Line 245- flavus and not A. niger has a value greater than 90% in Table 3. Also, add Aspergillus nomius because its value in Table 3 for elemicin concentration 0.4 mg/mL is greater than 90%.
Answer: It was corrected.
- Page 8, Lines 264-268- L. sativa should be in italics.
Answer: It was corrected.
- Given that, according to the aims and scope, the topic presented in this paper is not in accordance with the journal, I suggest that the paper be forwarded to another MDPI journal that fits better. Certainly, as far as the review procedure is concerned, I suggest that the paper be considered for publication after the proposed revision (but in a journal that is more suitable).
Answer: We respect your opinion but we do not agree. This manuscript is in the scope of the journal and the special issue in which it may be published. Several similar papers whose topics are similar to ours have already been published by Agronomy. See:
- Mirmostafaee, S. et al. (2020). Study of Allelopathic Interaction of Essential Oils from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants on Seed Germination and Seedling Growth of Lettuce. Agronomy, 10, 163. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10020163
- Sadeqifard, S. et al. (2022). Evaluation of Allelopathic Activity Interactions of Some Medicinal Plants Using Fractional Inhibitory Concentration and Isobologram. Agronomy, 12, 3001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12123001
- Soppelsa, S. et al. (2023). Essential Oils and Chitosan Applications to Protect Apples against Postharvest Diseases and to Extend Shelf Life. Agronomy, 13, 822. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13030822
- Mounira, G. M. et al. (2022). Essential Oil Composition and Antioxidant and Antifungal Activities of Two Varieties of Ocimum basilicum (Lamiaceae) at Two Phenological Stages. Agronomy, 12, 825. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040825
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe reseach has focused on the Calyptranthes concinna essential oil obtained from its dried leaves and its antifungal and antigerminative effect.
the abstract present the main results of the work and is complete
The introduction is complete and present a good structure and information, and states clearly the research questions. The major problem here and in the discussion is that there are quite a lot references which do not correspond to the statement which they are associated and some references are missing. You need to change those references to documents where the main research topic correspond to the associated references, it's not because they mention it that is a valid reference.
Then the material and method is complet except the description of the vegetal material, how were consituted the samples (how many plants/sample) and the stage of maturity of those leaves, in your discussion you focus a lot on the variability of the EOs composition according to the drying method, but there is also a large variability considering the weather, plant/leaves maturity and status (stressed or not) and agronomical conditions besides the genetypic variability withing the species, this is why so important to right characterise the vegetal material.
The results are well presented and discussion (attention to some references). Only you need to complete the legends, and combine table 2&3 and table 4&5, you can also make some statistical analysis in tables 2-3 between the dosis and the EOs and the molecule. Then you can add more comments to your tables.
The conclusion is in line with the results obtained
More details in the document attached
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Uberlândia, July 9th, 2024, Brazil.
Prof. Dr. Leslie A. Weston
Editor of Agronomy
Dear Dr. Weston,
First of all, we would like to thank you for dealing with our manuscript submission. We are submitting a revised version of our research article entitled “Antifungal and allelopathic effects of essential oil from Calyptranthes concinna DC. dried leaves and of its major constituent elemicin” to be considered for publication in Agronomy. The reviewers’ suggestions and criticism have provided us with a unique opportunity to improve the quality of our manuscript. We would also like to thank them. As recommended, we have replied to all their questions (below). Corrections are indicated in red in the manuscript.
Reviewer #2:
- the abstract present the main results of the work and is complete
The introduction is complete and present a good structure and information, and states clearly the research questions. The major problem here and in the discussion is that there are quite a lot references which do not correspond to the statement which they are associated and some references are missing. You need to change those references to documents where the main research topic correspond to the associated references, it's not because they mention it that is a valid reference.
Answer: All references were carefully reviewed and related to specific topics.
Then the material and method is complet except the description of the vegetal material, how were consituted the samples (how many plants/sample) and the stage of maturity of those leaves, in your discussion you focus a lot on the variability of the EOs composition according to the drying method, but there is also a large variability considering the weather, plant/leaves maturity and status (stressed or not) and agronomical conditions besides the genetypic variability withing the species, this is why so important to right characterise the vegetal material.
Answer: We added all data that you suggested.
The results are well presented and discussion (attention to some references). Only you need to complete the legends, and combine table 2&3 and table 4&5, you can also make some statistical analysis in tables 2-3 between the dosis and the EOs and the molecule. Then you can add more comments to your tables.
Answer: We decided to keep separated tables to make data observation easier and discuss them separately.
The conclusion is in line with the results obtained
More details in the document attached
Answer: All requests were met.
We have made all corrections suggested by the reviewers and we hope we have now met your expectations regarding the improvement of our manuscript. Let us know whether any further changes are necessary and we will be pleased to make them.
Sincerely yours,
Prof. Mayker Lazaro Dantas Miranda, Ph. D.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have modified the introduction and the material and method section which was two main problems of the document, but they have not changed the references that their main research do not correspond to the statement in the text. Precisely references 1, 2, 11, 28, 29
It's not just enough to say that you have changed, you need to do it, we are able to check.
Author Response
Uberlândia, July 10h, 2024, Brazil.
Prof. Dr. Leslie A. Weston
Editor of Agronomy
Dear Dr. Weston,
First of all, we would like to thank you for dealing with our manuscript submission. We are submitting a revised version of our research article entitled “Antifungal and allelopathic effects of essential oil from Calyptranthes concinna DC. dried leaves and of its major constituent elemicin” to be considered for publication in Agronomy. The reviewers’ suggestions and criticism have provided us with a unique opportunity to improve the quality of our manuscript. We would also like to thank them. As recommended, we have replied to all their questions (below). Corrections are indicated in red in the manuscript.
Reviewer #2:
1) The authors have modified the introduction and the material and method section which was two main problems of the document, but they have not changed the references that their main research do not correspond to the statement in the text. Precisely references 1, 2, 11, 28, 29.
Answer: References have been changed.
New references:
1. Chowanski, S.; Kudlewska, M.; Marciniak, P.; Rosinski, G. Synthetic insecticide - is there an alternative? Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2014, 23, 291-302.
2. Devi, P.I.; Manjula, M.; Bhavani, R.V. Agrochemicals, environment, and human health. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2022, 47, 399-421. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-120920-111015
11. Macías, F.A.; Molonillo, J.M.G.; Varela, R.M.; Galindo, J.C.G. Allelopathy - a natural alternative for weed control. Pest Mang. Sci. 2007, 63, 327-348. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1342
28. Nazzaro, F.; Fratianni, F.; Coppola, R.; De Feo, V. Essential oils and antifungal activity. Pharmaceuticals, 2017, 10, 86. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ph10040086
29. Martins, G.A.; Bicas, J.L. Antifungal activity of essential oils of tea tree, oregano, thyme, and cinnamon, and their components. Braz. J. Food Technol. 2024, 27, e2023071. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-6723.07123
We have made all corrections suggested by the reviewers and we hope we have now met your expectations regarding the improvement of our manuscript. Let us know whether any further changes are necessary and we will be pleased to make them.
Sincerely yours,
Prof. Mayker Lazaro Dantas Miranda, Ph. D.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsNow the authors have changed the 5 references, that were missing in the previous, review and the document is ready to be published
