Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of Three Hydroponically Grown Ornamental Plants
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Line15 : Please remove the bracket of (Pb).. should be only Pb
Line 78: Please write the full form of CK, T1, T2, T3, and T4. Authors should provide the full form of abbreviation wherever first time any abbreviation or short form use/come.
Line 103 -108: Authors talk about the estimation of TI, TF and EC. It would be good, if authors will provide the formula/ equation of all.
Please follow the similar pattern to cite the figure in text. In line 112, 249 and so on authors used short form that is Fig. and other pace full name Figure.
Line 115-121: Authors should do the interpretation of data/values with the similar units which used in figures/tables. Please check the units used in text to explain t Pb stress on the biomass of ornamental plants under the subheading 3.1 . Here, authors present the data in percentage while in figure 1 put the different unit. Please check it.
Line 115-121: In figure 1, authors put the capital letter A,B, C, D while not explain the figure caption what is the mean of that. Ditto issue in figure 2 and 4.
In Figure 2: Please check the values TI presented in figure via bar graph as it is not matching with the values discussed with in the text. Particularly for T. patula and M.jalapa
Line 165-166: “ Tegetes minuta and Bidens Pilosa” …. Should be italic.
Table 1and 2: Authors should provide the full form of abbreviation used in table. Either in table caption or below the table.
Line 178-188: Ditto comments as raise/ given for data values presentation under the subsection of 3.1.
Figure 3: Please explain the mean of capital (A,B, C) put in figure
Author Response
General reply:
We thank the five reviewers for their positive comments and constructive suggestions, which have helped us to improve this manuscript. We changed the figures and text and had the language corrected by a professional editing service to meet the requirements of the journal. The lines indicated below correspond to the modified version.
Reviewer 1 (Comments for the Author):
1）Line15 : Please remove the bracket of (Pb).. should be only Pb
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We corrected it. Line 20.
2）Line 78: Please write the full form of CK, T1, T2, T3, and T4. Authors should provide the full form of abbreviation wherever first time any abbreviation or short form use/come.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We corrected it. Lines 122-124.
3）Line 103 -108: Authors talk about the estimation of TI, TF and EC. It would be good, if authors will provide the formula/ equation of all.
Please follow the similar pattern to cite the figure in text. In line 112, 249 and so on authors used short form that is Fig. and other pace full name Figure.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added formulas to the article. Lines 162-166. Regarding the representation of charts, we carefully checked applsci-template.
4）Line 115-121: Authors should do the interpretation of data/values with the similar units which used in figures/tables. Please check the units used in text to explain t Pb stress on the biomass of ornamental plants under the subheading 3.1 . Here, authors present the data in percentage while in figure 1 put the different unit. Please check it.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added specific values of change to the article, and we have also used percentages to indicate the magnitude of change.
5）Line 115-121: In figure 1, authors put the capital letter A,B, C, D while not explain the figure caption what is the mean of that. Ditto issue in figure 2 and 4.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion, we have modified the diagram for a clearer representation.
6）In Figure 2: Please check the values TI presented in figure via bar graph as it is not matching with the values discussed with in the text. Particularly for T. patula and M.jalapa
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion, We carefully checked the experimental values.
7）Line 165-166: “ Tegetes minuta and Bidens Pilosa” …. Should be italic.
Table 1and 2: Authors should provide the full form of abbreviation used in table. Either in table caption or below the table.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion, “Tegetes minuta and Bidens Pilosa” was changed to italic. Line 232. The abbreviation used in table was provided the full form. Lines 272, 371-372.
8） Line 178-188: Ditto comments as raise/ given for data values presentation under the subsection of 3.1.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added specific values of change to the article, and we have also used percentages to indicate the magnitude of change.
9）Figure 3: Please explain the mean of capital (A,B, C) put in figure
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. A,B,C... The letters indicate the order of the chart, which we have modified.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript titled "Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture" communicated to the ESPR reviewed and some specific comments are as follows:
I appreciate the author's efforts in carrying out the present work, which is scientifically well-designed.
It is observed that the manuscript is written well. The authors should avoid using first person pronouns I and we in their manuscript. Ex: page 8 – 258 line in conclusion.
The introduction is written well with state-of-the-art of the work with your goals.
Experimental setup, treatment, lead estimation and calculation of indices followed standard methods.
The results were presented well, but it can improve further. The statistical analysis was conducted parameter-wise and the results were presented accordingly. The application of ANOVA results is presented well. I suggest to the compare variances across the means (or average) of different groups in a tabular form and explaining the scenarios obtained from results to determine if there is any difference between the means of other groups.
It is observed that the 3.2 and 3.3 headings are similar. Pl check and modify or merge.
3.2. Effects of Pb stress on the tolerance index of ornamental plants
3.3. Effects of Pb stress on the tolerance index of ornamental plants
The discussion requires revision. Pb effects were well documented. For better representation, you can compare the results obtained with previous Pb hyperaccumulator studies.
References are up to date.
Author Response
General reply:
We thank the five reviewers for their positive comments and constructive suggestions, which have helped us to improve this manuscript. We changed the figures and text and had the language corrected by a professional editing service to meet the requirements of the journal. The lines indicated below correspond to the modified version.
Reviewer 2 (Comments for the Author):
The manuscript titled "Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture" communicated to the ESPR reviewed and some specific comments are as follows:
I appreciate the author's efforts in carrying out the present work, which is scientifically well-designed.
1) It is observed that the manuscript is written well. The authors should avoid using first person pronouns I and we in their manuscript. Ex: page 8 – 258 line in conclusion.
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestions. We have made changes to this section. Lines 390-392.
2) The results were presented well, but it can improve further. The statistical analysis was conducted parameter-wise and the results were presented accordingly. The application of ANOVA results is presented well. I suggest to the compare variances across the means (or average) of different groups in a tabular form and explaining the scenarios obtained from results to determine if there is any difference between the means of other groups.
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestions. We have used lower case letters in the figures to indicate differences between treatments.
3) It is observed that the 3.2 and 3.3 headings are similar. Pl check and modify or merge.
3.2. Effects of Pb stress on the tolerance index of ornamental plants
3.3. Effects of Pb stress on the tolerance index of ornamental plants
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We corrected it. Lines 225, 249.
4) The discussion requires revision. Pb effects were well documented. For better representation, you can compare the results obtained with previous Pb hyperaccumulator studies.
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestions. We have made changes to the discussion section. Lines 184-304.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Paper No.: Manuscript ID applsci-2644595 (Applied Sciences)
Title: Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of three Orna-mental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture
General Comments:
The scientific paper titled "Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture" , Based on the provided information in paper, there seems to be a gap in research regarding the relationship between root morphology of ornamental plants and their ability to tolerate and enrich heavy metal Pb. So, it investigates the lead tolerance and enrichment characteristics of three ornamental plants, namely Tagetes patula, Solanum nigrum, and Mirabilis jalapa, under hydroponic culture conditions. The study assesses the plants' ability to cope with lead stress by subjecting them to different lead concentrations.
The research aims to select ornamental plants with a strong ability to enrich lead and investigate the relationship between root architecture and the plants' ability to tolerate and enrich lead through hydroponic experiments.
In general, the manuscript was not well written with numerous grammar and vocabulary errors as well as ambiguous expressions, low resolution for Figs. Language editing is needed before resubmitting. The result section is without substantive description.
Some detailed comments：
1. Title: the current title is meaningful and brief (good state),
2. Abstract: good state, but it needs few sentences as possible, and What is the impact of lead stress on the growth and biomass production of three different ornamental plants under hydroponic culture?, Are Tagetes patula, Solanum nigrum, and Mirabilis jalapa hyperaccumulators of heavy metal Pb and how do they cope with Pb stress? How does the plasticity of plant roots affect their tolerance and transfer ability of heavy metals such as Pb? Can the results of the hydroponic experiment be applied to a real heavy metal-contaminated soil environment, and how can plant tolerance be increased by enriching plant roots' plasticity conditions?
3. Introduction: The introduction provides a good overview of the topic but could benefit from more context to engage the reader. Consider adding a few sentences that explain why this research is important and how it contributes to the existing literature.
4. Materials and methods : it suggests that you provide more detail on the hydroponic culture system used in the study, including the nutrient solution composition and pH levels. Has Authors been used statistical analysis design to analysis your data, software used for validation and comparison of averages? It recommends that you include more information on the lead exposure levels and duration of exposure for each plant species. methodology section should be divided to sub-sections, In summary, 2-1- a detailed explanation of the methods used in the hydroponic experiment, including plant selection,2-2. seedling treatment, nutrient solution composition, 2-3. Pb stress levels,2-4. sample analysis, and data analysis
5. Results &Discussion: It was necessary to rewrite the text which should be improved, and present your results as numbers and P-values with statistical tests, to the relevant items while discussing the results. This section should highlight significant or interesting results along with the P-values of the statistical tests in all figures and this section's table. Furthermore, the results and discussion section of your research paper should include limitations to your work, and episodic and deductive arguments. please explain why decrease in fresh weight and dry weight of the shoots and roots of the plants with increasing Pb (lead) concentration, This effect was significant and varied across the three ornamental plants tested (T. patula, S. nigrum, and M. jalapa).
6. Conclusion: Good state
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
General reply:
We thank the five reviewers for their positive comments and constructive suggestions, which have helped us to improve this manuscript. We changed the figures and text and had the language corrected by a professional editing service to meet the requirements of the journal. The lines indicated below correspond to the modified version.
Reviewer 3 (Comments for the Author):
General Comments:
The scientific paper titled "Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture" , Based on the provided information in paper, there seems to be a gap in research regarding the relationship between root morphology of ornamental plants and their ability to tolerate and enrich heavy metal Pb. So, it investigates the lead tolerance and enrichment characteristics of three ornamental plants, namely Tagetes patula, Solanum nigrum, and Mirabilis jalapa, under hydroponic culture conditions. The study assesses the plants' ability to cope with lead stress by subjecting them to different lead concentrations.
The research aims to select ornamental plants with a strong ability to enrich lead and investigate the relationship between root architecture and the plants' ability to tolerate and enrich lead through hydroponic experiments.
In general, the manuscript was not well written with numerous grammar and vocabulary errors as well as ambiguous expressions, low resolution for Figs. Language editing is needed before resubmitting. The result section is without substantive description.
Some detailed comments：
1) Abstract: good state, but it needs few sentences as possible, and What is the impact of lead stress on the growth and biomass production of three different ornamental plants under hydroponic culture? Are Tagetes patula, Solanum nigrum, and Mirabilis jalapa hyperaccumulators of heavy metal Pb and how do they cope with Pb stress? How does the plasticity of plant roots affect their tolerance and transfer ability of heavy metals such as Pb? Can the results of the hydroponic experiment be applied to a real heavy metal-contaminated soil environment, and how can plant tolerance be increased by enriching plant roots' plasticity conditions?
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestions, we have rewritten the summary section to clarify a few of the issues you raised, based on your suggestions. Lines 14-32.
2) Introduction: The introduction provides a good overview of the topic but could benefit from more context to engage the reader. Consider adding a few sentences that explain why this research is important and how it contributes to the existing literature.
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestions. The importance of the study and the contribution of the article are explained. Lines 64-85.
3) Materials and methods : it suggests that you provide more detail on the hydroponic culture system used in the study, including the nutrient solution composition and pH levels. Has Authors been used statistical analysis design to analysis your data, software used for validation and comparison of averages? It recommends that you include more information on the lead exposure levels and duration of exposure for each plant species. methodology section should be divided to sub-sections, In summary, 2-1- a detailed explanation of the methods used in the hydroponic experiment, including plant selection,2-2. seedling treatment, nutrient solution composition, 2-3. Pb stress levels,2-4. sample analysis, and data analysis
Reply: Thank you for your valuable comments, we have rewritten written the Materials and Methods section. Lines 99-167.
4) Results &Discussion: It was necessary to rewrite the text which should be improved, and present your results as numbers and P-values with statistical tests, to the relevant items while discussing the results. This section should highlight significant or interesting results along with the P-values of the statistical tests in all figures and this section's table. Furthermore, the results and discussion section of your research paper should include limitations to your work, and episodic and deductive arguments. please explain why decrease in fresh weight and dry weight of the shoots and roots of the plants with increasing Pb (lead) concentration, This effect was significant and varied across the three ornamental plants tested (T. patula, S. nigrum, and M. jalapa).
Reply: Thank you for your suggestions. We have rewritten the Results and Discussion section based on the suggestions you made.
5) Minor editing of English language required
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have commissioned English editing to proofread the full text.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript "Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of Three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture" by Shao et al.. The research delves into examining the lead tolerance and enrichment characteristics of three ornamental plants within a hydroponic environment. The manuscript is well-organized and articulates the background, methodology, results, and conclusions clearly. The introduction sufficiently contextualizes and motivates the study, making a notable contribution to comprehending lead tolerance and enrichment traits in ornamental plants under hydroponic conditions. Addressing the mentioned minor points will significantly enhance the manuscript's quality and impact.
The utilization of the hydroponic culture method is fitting for evaluating lead tolerance and enrichment in ornamental plants. However, to bolster reproducibility, it is imperative to provide additional specifics regarding the precise hydroponic configuration, lead concentrations, and duration of exposure.
The results are presented lucidly and are in harmony with the study's objectives. Incorporating statistical analysis to validate the observed variations in lead tolerance and enrichment among the ornamental plants would be advantageous. Additionally, a thorough revision of the figures for enhanced clarity, visibility, explicit labeling, and comprehensive captions is essential.
The discussion proficiently interprets the results and draws comparisons with existing literature. It would be beneficial to discuss the potential ramifications of the findings concerning the utilization of these plants for phytoremediation or landscaping contaminated areas.
The language used maintains a professional and suitable tone for a scientific manuscript. However, a final proofread to rectify minor grammatical and typographical errors is advisable.
References:
The referenced sources are pertinent and current. However, it is essential to ensure consistent formatting in accordance with the prescribed MDPI citation style. For instance, adhering to the style demonstrated in the report by Lu et al. (2020) [14] and Shao et al. (2021) [18] is necessary.
Minor grammatical and typographical errors is advisable
Author Response
General reply:
We thank the five reviewers for their positive comments and constructive suggestions, which have helped us to improve this manuscript. We changed the figures and text and had the language corrected by a professional editing service to meet the requirements of the journal. The lines indicated below correspond to the modified version.
Reviewer 4 (Comments for the Author):
The manuscript "Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of Three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture" by Shao et al.. The research delves into examining the lead tolerance and enrichment characteristics of three ornamental plants within a hydroponic environment. The manuscript is well-organized and articulates the background, methodology, results, and conclusions clearly. The introduction sufficiently contextualizes and motivates the study, making a notable contribution to comprehending lead tolerance and enrichment traits in ornamental plants under hydroponic conditions. Addressing the mentioned minor points will significantly enhance the manuscript's quality and impact.
1) The utilization of the hydroponic culture method is fitting for evaluating lead tolerance and enrichment in ornamental plants. However, to bolster reproducibility, it is imperative to provide additional specifics regarding the precise hydroponic configuration, lead concentrations, and duration of exposure.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added this part to the 2.2. Material Cultivation and Experimental Design. Lines 107-118.
2) The results are presented lucidly and are in harmony with the study's objectives. Incorporating statistical analysis to validate the observed variations in lead tolerance and enrichment among the ornamental plants would be advantageous. Additionally, a thorough revision of the figures for enhanced clarity, visibility, explicit labeling, and comprehensive captions is essential.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have refined the results section of the text and all figures have been thoroughly revised.
3) The discussion proficiently interprets the results and draws comparisons with existing literature. It would be beneficial to discuss the potential ramifications of the findings concerning the utilization of these plants for phytoremediation or landscaping contaminated areas.
Reply: Agree with your thoughts and we have added this section to the Results & Discussion section. Lines 348-350.
4) The language used maintains a professional and suitable tone for a scientific manuscript. However, a final proofread to rectify minor grammatical and typographical errors is advisable.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have commissioned English editing to proofread the full text.
5) References:
The referenced sources are pertinent and current. However, it is essential to ensure consistent formatting in accordance with the prescribed MDPI citation style. For instance, adhering to the style demonstrated in the report by Lu et al. (2020) [14] and Shao et al. (2021) [18] is necessary.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We corrected it. Lines 100, 127-129.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Journal: Applied sciences
Title: Lead Tolerance and Enrichment Characteristics of three Ornamental Plants Under Hydroponic Culture
The authors investigate the use of three ornamental plants for phytoremediation of lead-contaminated soil. Research has shown that plants are hyperaccumulators and that they could eventually be used for the aforementioned purposes.
This is a short laboratory investigation that is clearly explained in this manuscript. I repeat, at the level of laboratory research, everything is clear, and at the end, in the conclusion, the authors stated the need for in situ phytoremediation.
Namely, it is known that the authors used annual ornamental plants. Every year there is a need for sowing plants, cultivation… The life time of these plants is about half a year. Plants should be watered daily. All this requires additional costs. In the manuscript, the possibility of actual application should be stated in view of the above.
Line 79: ml change to mL
Lines 98-109: The equations used for the calculation of the mentioned parameters should be written in chapter 2, regardless of the citation of the literature.
Lines 165-166: Use italics for Latin plant names.
Author Response
General reply:
We thank the five reviewers for their positive comments and constructive suggestions, which have helped us to improve this manuscript. We changed the figures and text and had the language corrected by a professional editing service to meet the requirements of the journal. The lines indicated below correspond to the modified version.
Reviewer 5 (Comments for the Author):
The authors investigate the use of three ornamental plants for phytoremediation of lead-contaminated soil. Research has shown that plants are hyperaccumulators and that they could eventually be used for the aforementioned purposes.
This is a short laboratory investigation that is clearly explained in this manuscript. I repeat, at the level of laboratory research, everything is clear, and at the end, in the conclusion, the authors stated the need for in situ phytoremediation.
1) Namely, it is known that the authors used annual ornamental plants. Every year there is a need for sowing plants, cultivation… The life time of these plants is about half a year. Plants should be watered daily. All this requires additional costs. In the manuscript, the possibility of actual application should be stated in view of the above.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added this part to the conclusion section.
“In addition, the ornamental plants examined in this study were also annual ornamental plants. Plants must be sown, cultivated, and regularly watered each year. All of this entails significant expenses. Future studies might look into picking certain perennial ornamental plants or collaborating with local landscape management.” Lines 386-390.
2) Line 79: ml change to mL
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We corrected it. Line 121.
3) Lines 98-109: The equations used for the calculation of the mentioned parameters should be written in chapter 2, regardless of the citation of the literature.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added the formulas to the manuscript. Lines 154-160.
4) Lines 165-166: Use italics for Latin plant names.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. We corrected it. Line 257.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
