Yield, Essential Oil Content, and Quality Performance of Lavandula angustifolia Leaves, as Affected by Supplementary Irrigation and Drying Methods
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript entitled “Yield, essential oil content and quality performances of Lavandula angustifolia as affected by supplementary irrigation and drying method” presents a very systematic and complete study about how water stress and drying processes affect the yield and composition of essential oil. The aim is clear, the methodology appropriate, the result presentation adequate and the discussion supported by results.
However, I have only few comments to be corrected in the text:
- The word “leaves” should appear in the title.
- The specific name of a plant, e.g. Lavandula angustifolia, has to be cited complete and in italics just the first time the specie is cited in text; the following ones only the initial of genre has to be cited (L. angustifolia). Check the whole manuscript because there are several repetitions with different species.
- Tables are not ordered as they appear in the text.
- Line 70: the reference for European Pharmacopeia is not present in the list
- Lines 89-91: correct the format.
- Line 149: the authors used a water extract for measuring TPC and DPPH assay. How was this extract obtained? This point is not specified in Materials and Methods.
- Lines 158-159: correct the format of the references
- Line 171: dm3
- Reference 43 is not present in the text
Author Response
Reviewer 1 Report The manuscript entitled “Yield, essential oil content and quality performances of Lavandula angustifolia as affected by supplementary irrigation and drying method” presents a very systematic and complete study about how water stress and drying processes affect the yield and composition of essential oil. The aim is clear, the methodology appropriate, the result presentation adequate and the discussion supported by results. However, I have only few comments to be corrected in the text:
Author Response Reviewier 1
Q: The word “leaves” should appear in the title.
A: provided the word ‘leaves’ in the title
Q: The specific name of a plant, e.g. Lavandula angustifolia, has to be cited complete and in italics just the first time the specie is cited in text; the following ones only the initial of genre has to be cited (L. angustifolia). Check the whole manuscript because there are several repetitions with different species.
A: all this mistakes were corrected in the revised manuscript
Q: Tables are not ordered as they appear in the text.
A: all this mistakes in the numbering of the tables were corrected in the revised manuscript
Q: Line 70: the reference for European Pharmacopeia is not present in the list
A: done (line 593)
Q: Lines 89-91: correct the format.
A: corrected in line 99-101 Q: Line 149: the authors used a water extract for measuring TPC and DPPH assay. How was this extract obtained? This point is not specified in Materials and Methods. A: in section 2.6.1. we described the extract obtained (line: 161-164) Q: Lines 158-159: correct the format of the references A: done (line 598-601) Q:Line 171: dm3 A: corrected in line 188)
Q: Reference 43 is not present in the text A: we removed reference 43
Many thanks for important comments and suggestions.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Agriculture review
Major revision
The language in the text is very poor. There is a lot of cohesion and coherence mistakes along with grammar.
Abstract
The abstract has a serious flaw. The structure of the sentences should be rephrased according to the aim of the research. The highest percent values should have included. The relational of the research has not been depicted clearly. Overall it was written very poorly.
The chemicals name into the sentence should be started with small letter. The main findings i.e which one (WI and NI method) is more suitable for the yield and composition for essential oil did not mention clearly.
Introduction:
The introduction section did not reflect the rationale of the work due to very limited examples are discussed.
Line 80-82: Delete the sentence. This section must put in the other section i.e discussion or concussion section.
At the end of this section, the aim of the research has not been written clearly.
Materials and Methods
Section 2.2 discussed indiscriminately. It must arrange in the separate paragraph with appropriate headings.
The temperature symbol should be fixed entire the MS (Degree Celsius)
Line 153: Is it coffee acid?
How many times the irrigation applied?
Results
Why you set the experiment for natural and oven-dried methods? The authors did not discuss the reasons.
The naturally dried material showed less TPA and DPPH than the oven dried. What will be when calculated on dried basis of the naturally dried material? Will it be similar to the oven dried? Please compare to the oven dried values.
Where is the literature Values of RI that mentioned in the experimental section (Adams, 2004).
Line 250: Which are (compounds) absent in oven dried materials? Is there any significant role of the absent compound on the antioxidant activity?
Line 292 and 295: Please indicate the percent for each compound.
Line 362: Please put a citation on the basis of your argument
Line 408-409: Is the sentence correct. ‘’while in the case of drying under natural conditions the
percentage of both groups of compounds was similar.’’
Conclusion: This section should be rearranged according to the findings.
References: The references cited in the text are not fit with the journal style. For example Line 187.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Author Response Reviewier 2
Q: The language in the text is very poor. There is a lot of cohesion and coherence mistakes along with grammar.
A: text were reviewed by English specialist
Q: Abstract
The abstract has a serious flaw. The structure of the sentences should be rephrased according to the aim of the research.
The highest percent values should have included. The relational of the research has not been depicted clearly. Overall it was written very poorly.
The chemicals name into the sentence should be started with small letter. The main findings i.e which one (WI and NI method) is more suitable for the yield and composition for essential oil did not mention clearly.
A: we modified the section, please see the revised version. We added highest percent values of compounds. All this mistakes in chemical name were corrected in the revised manuscript. We added information which one (WI and NI method) is more suitable for the yield and composition for essential oil in the section.
Q: Introduction:
The introduction section did not reflect the rationale of the work due to very limited examples are discussed.
A: we provided in lines 64-66; 68-71 and 9 new references in the frame of subject
Q: Line 80-82: Delete the sentence. This section must put in the other section i.e discussion or concussion section.
A: we removed the sentence
Q: At the end of this section, the aim of the research has not been written clearly.
A: we modified the end of this section (line 89-90)
Q: Materials and Methods
Section 2.2 discussed indiscriminately. It must arrange in the separate paragraph with appropriate headings.
A: done separate paragraphs with appropriate headings
Q: The temperature symbol should be fixed entire the MS (Degree Celsius)
A: all this mistakes were corrected in the revised manuscript
Q:Line 153: Is it coffee acid?
A: corrected to caffeic acid
Q:How many times the irrigation applied?
A: provided in lines 129-130
Q: Results
Why you set the experiment for natural and oven-dried methods? The authors did not discuss the reasons.
A: provided in lines 365-371
Q: The naturally dried material showed less TPA and DPPH than the oven dried. What will be when calculated on dried basis of the naturally dried material? Will it be similar to the oven dried? Please compare to the oven dried values.
A: provided in lines 403-405
Q: Where is the literature Values of RI that mentioned in the experimental section (Adams, 2004).
A: provided in lines 602-603
Q: Line 250: Which are (compounds) absent in oven dried materials? Is there any significant role of the absent compound on the antioxidant activity?
A: provided in lines 403-407
Q: Line 292 and 295: Please indicate the percent for each compound.
A: done in lines 316-327
Q: Line 362: Please put a citation on the basis of your argument
A: provided in line 401
Q:Line 408-409: Is the sentence correct. ‘’while in the case of drying under natural conditions the
percentage of both groups of compounds was similar.’’
A: corrected in lines 447-449
Q: Conclusion: This section should be rearranged according to the findings.
A: we rearranged this section
Q: References: The references cited in the text are not fit with the journal style. For example Line 187.
A: done in line 602
Many thanks for important comments and suggestions.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Minor revision
1. Table 9
The compound name in the table should be started a capital letter
for example α-Pinene. but in the sentence, it should be started small letter
2. The temperature symbol is still uncorrected
3. Conclusion
Line 441-442 :Please rephrase ''The obtained satisfactory yielding effects as a result of irrigation testify to the usefulness of the drip system in the field raw cultivation of L. angustifolia plants for industry.''
4. There is no plagiarism objection.
Author Response
Minor revision
Q:Table 9 The compound name in the table should be started a capital letter
for example α-Pinene. but in the sentence, it should be started small letter
A: all this mistakes (in Table 9) were corrected in the revised manuscript
Q:The temperature symbol is still uncorrected
A: all this mistakes were corrected in the revised manuscript, Excuse me, the errors were due to damage to the computer
Q: Conclusion
Line 441-442 :Please rephrase ''The obtained satisfactory yielding effects as a result of irrigation testify to the usefulness of the drip system in the field raw cultivation of L. angustifolia plants for industry.''
A: We removed this sentence because is very similar the next sentence
- There is no plagiarism objection.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
