Graphical and Numerical Analysis of the Components of Gene Effect on the Quality Traits of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under Varying Environmental Conditions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

Dear authors,

You have made the necessary corrections, but the discussion part still needs to be improved. There are many articles on this subject and it has to be discussed with the findings obtained.

Author Response

Thanks for good suggestions. Accepted and included 4 references in discussion part.

See also reference. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

In the future, English grammar must be improved! First sentence of the abstract, very first sentence is not clear to me!! ,,Improving quality traits in wheat mainly cereals''?? I assume what you wanted to say but it's little confusing. Wheat is one of the main cereals. Not to mention some other lines. I understand what is written but is not well, it consumes reading time.

Author Response

Thanks

Accepted and improved

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 It would be better if main values of the examined components are presented. Where is discussion in the paper? Where is your statement in this research? E1 E2 E3 and E4 are just different growing seasons and like that are deficient for gene effects conclusion regarding title ''under varying environmental conditions''. Maybe you could present growing conditions differences in those 4 environments, but it would be better if you can present results from different locations. References are mostly moderate to obsolete, must be newer. For high ranked journal like this one, you must state some novelties in your research.

Author Response

Thanks for comments. As experiment has finished. Hence, repetition of experiment over the location is not possible. A short discussion is given in section 4. 

Reviewer 2 Report

 

In this study, using 10 different genotypes of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) as materials, two standard checks were evaluated in four environments (E1-E4). The analysis of the components of gene effect revealed that most of the characters (including gluten, wet gluten (E2), starch contents (E3), protein content (E1 and E3), sedimentation value (E1, E2, and E3), and starch content (E1)) were governed by additive and dominant gene actions in the environments. For a given population, these results may be helpful in isolating superior recombinants for the development of desired parents in future breeding programs. However, from the analysis method, the main conclusion, as well as the content of the abstract, there are several major concerns that need to be addressed by the authors.

 

Major concerns:

1.     In terms of the analytical method, Line76-78: it is very confusing when the author describes it using two references, and how does this method relate to the method described in the title? No any improvement or specificity was observed in the analytical method.

 

2.     The two main conclusions (a. The analysis of the components of gene effect revealed that most of the characters were governed by additive and dominant gene actions in the environments; b. The influence of the dominant gene was higher than that of the additive gene) are, in my view, already known ^[1].

 

3.     The authors should clearly indicate in the abstract which set of parental combinations have been screened out to be more advantageous in breeding through this study^[2].

 

Minor concerns：

1.     Please add an explanation of Wr and Vr on line 115 for easy understanding.

 

2.     Please provide a clear explanation of the use of parameters to define various genetic/gene effects in the method, such as the critical value of H2/4H1 corresponding to different genetic effects in line 134, and how to judge the dominance according to KD/KR in line 136. The definition of these values can help readers better understand different genetic effects.

 

3.     Suggestions for the pictures in the text: a, please use different colors to distinguish the parabola from the regression line; b. Please add a legend for the blue rectangle.

 

Reference：

1.       Al-Timimi, Omar & Al-Jubori, Jasim & El Hosary, Ahmed. (2020). GENETIC ANALYSIS OF F 1 DIALLEL CROSS IN WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.). Plant Archives. 20. 4131-4137.

2.       Joshi SK, Sharma SN, Singhania DL, Sain RS. Combining ability in the F1 and F2 generations of diallel cross in hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L. em. Thell). Hereditas. 2004;141(2):115-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5223.2004.01730.x. PMID: 15660971.

Author Response

Sr. No.	Comments		Response/Action
	In this study, using 10 different genotypes of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) as materials, two standard checks were evaluated in four environments (E1-E4). The analysis of the components of gene effect revealed that most of the characters (including gluten, wet gluten (E2), starch contents (E3), protein content (E1 and E3), sedimentation value (E1, E2, and E3), and starch content (E1)) were governed by additive and dominant gene actions in the environments. For a given population, these results may be helpful in isolating superior recombinants for the development of desired parents in future breeding programs. However, from the analysis method, the main conclusion, as well as the content of the abstract, there are several major concerns that need to be addressed by the authors.		Thanks
Major concerns:
1.	In terms of the analytical method, Line76-78: it is very confusing when the author describes it using two references, and how does this method relate to the method described in the title? No any improvement or specificity was observed in the analytical method.		In paper both analytical method used. These methods are helpful in isolating superior recombinants for the development of desired parents in future breeding programs. The improvement is given in discussion.
2.	The two main conclusions (a. The analysis of the components of gene effect revealed that most of the characters were governed by additive and dominant gene actions in the environments; b. The influence of the dominant gene was higher than that of the additive gene) are, in my view, already known [1].		In this view, analysis of the gene effects mainly in quality characters not routine characters.
3	The authors should clearly indicate in the abstract which set of parental combinations have been screened out to be more advantageous in breeding through this study [2].		In this study, not indicate set of parental combinations because not doing any of the cross combinations.
	Minor concerns：
1	Please add an explanation of Wr and Vr on line 115 for easy understanding.	Accepted and see result in 3.2.
2	Please provide a clear explanation of the use of parameters to define various genetic/gene effects in the method, such as the critical value of H2/4H1 corresponding to different genetic effects in line 134, and how to judge the dominance according to KD/KR in line 136. The definition of these values can help readers better understand different genetic effects.	Accepted and see results, clearly mentioned about each parameter in results like how to each character perform in each environment.
3	Suggestions for the pictures in the text: a, please use different colors to distinguish the parabola from the regression line; b. Please add a legend for the blue rectangle.	Thanks for good suggestion. But this graph is automated so do not any change colors in figure.
	Reference：
1	Al-Timimi, Omar & Al-Jubori, Jasim & El Hosary, Ahmed. (2020). GENETIC ANALYSIS OF F 1 DIALLEL CROSS IN WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.). Plant Archives. 20. 4131-4137.	checked
2	Joshi SK, Sharma SN, Singhania DL, Sain RS. Combining ability in the F1 and F2 generations of diallel cross in hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L. em. Thell). Hereditas. 2004;141(2):115-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5223.2004.01730.x. PMID: 15660971.	checked

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I think this article contains useful information for wheat breeding. The article is well written; however, it requires fine/minor spell check. Other minor suggestions has been highlighted in the attached file.

The traits examined in this study are affected by the environment and so to clearly understand environmental effects, you should add climatic conditions and soil analysis to M&M.

On the other hand, discussion part is very weak and should be definitely expanded. There are many articles on this subject and it should be discussed with the findings obtained.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Sr. No.	Comments	Response/Action
	I think this article contains useful information for wheat breeding. The article is well written; however, it requires fine/minor spell check. Other minor suggestion has been highlighted in the attached file. The traits examined in this study are affected by the environment and so to clearly understand environmental effects, you should add climatic conditions and soil analysis to M&M. On the other hand, discussion part is very weak and should be definitely expanded. There are many articles on this subject and it should be discussed with the findings obtained.	Thanks for minor observation. Accepted and corrected as per attached review comments pdf. See track change manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx