Metabolomics Analysis of Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) Affected by Low Potassium Supply
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I have carefully read the manuscript (agriculture-1802220) which investigates the effect of low K stress on various metabolites (metabolic response) of lettuce saplings in a closed cultivation room under controlled conditions. The evaluation was conducted based on large-scale untargeted metabolomics analysis using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry for the K group.
Here are some suggestions for improvement of the MS:
TITLE
’Metabolomics analysis in lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) induced by 2 low potassium supply’ should be ’Metabolomics analysis of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) induced by 2 low potassium supply’
Line 88. beware of the page break.
Lines 100-101 Correct the font size in the sentence.
Although the experiment was well organised, to make such a conclusion, authors should perform more repetitions of the experiment. Additionally, comparison between two or more cultivars of lettuce should be taken into account, as well as introduction of some methods which would confirm standard quality analyses of lettuce plants.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for your comments and valuable suggestions on our manuscript. According to your opinions, we have revised the manuscript. We would like to show you all the changes in the revision by point to point. All the changes have been marked in blue in the revision. Thank you again for your time and effort that goes into the correction of this paper.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Hongyan Gao, Liyan Gong, Jiheng Ni, Qinglin Li
School of Agricultural Engineering
Jiangsu University
Zhenjiang, Jiangsu 212013, China
Tel.: +86-1505-292-9291
Fax: +86 511 88797338
[email protected] (H.G.)
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Abstract
- The problem statement/ research gap is missing
- The last statement is inappropriate , I would suggest the authors to rewrite as recommendation for future study.
- The conclusive statement is too general
Introduction
- It is clearly written and it provides sufficient background information to the readers.
Materials and Methods
- Section 2.1: “The best looking plant” is very subjective. Please carefully describe the criteria of selection such as color, texture, age etc. This part is very crucial as plant conditions affect the metabolomic profile.
- Figure 1: Detail out (a) (b)…. In the figure caption
- Section 2.3 should be placed at next line.
- What is the duration of lyophilization.
- Please specify how do you prepare the test sample for “control”.
Results
- Results are clearly presented.
Discussion
- The discussion is too general. Please relate your results with previous studies.
- Although the number of down-regulated metabolites is low, but discussion is still needed to address these metabolites.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for your comments and valuable suggestions on our manuscript. According to your opinions, we have revised the manuscript. We would like to show you all the changes in the revision by point to point. All the changes have been marked in blue in the revision. Thank you again for your time and effort that goes into the correction of this paper.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Hongyan Gao, Liyan Gong, Jiheng Ni, Qinglin Li
School of Agricultural Engineering
Jiangsu University
Zhenjiang, Jiangsu 212013, China
Tel.: +86-1505-292-9291
Fax: +86 511 88797338
[email protected] (H.G.)
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript focuses on lettuce and the metabolite profiles under low K availability. The introduction should be improved considering the role of K in plant physiology and biochemistry. Moreover, describe the effect of K deficiency on crop performance.
Materials and methods: please report the light conditions in terms of photoperiod, light intensity, and LED spectrum information (such as blue light emission 444 nm red light etc.)
Figure 1 can be used as graphical abstract and reported in the supplementary files.
Fertilization solution is missed, please report the full mineral components. Since the aim of the work to have the metabolic profile under K deficiency this information is very important.
How much K was in the low K treatment?
Please provide a mineral composition of the plants when the metabolomic analysis was performed.
Results reported that 40 metabolites were associated with K deficiency. Among these metabolites are associated with primary or secondary metabolism. Please provide to link the results with the plant metabolism and try to provide a possible explanation of their function.
A quantification of the most metabolites should be also reported.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for your comments and valuable suggestions on our manuscript. According to your opinions, we have revised the manuscript. We would like to show you all the changes in the revision by point to point. All the changes have been marked in blue in the revision. Thank you again for your time and effort that goes into the correction of this paper.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Hongyan Gao, Liyan Gong, Jiheng Ni, Qinglin Li
School of Agricultural Engineering
Jiangsu University
Zhenjiang, Jiangsu 212013, China
Tel.: +86-1505-292-9291
Fax: +86 511 88797338
[email protected] (H.G.)
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have carefully read the author's reply to my comments.
Although authors added content of nitrogen in the samples (lines 104-108 of revised manuscript), they didn't add the method used for obtaining these results.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for your comment and valuable suggestion on our manuscript. According to your opinion, we have revised the manuscript. The methods used for obtaining total nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium content added in line 104-111, the change has been marked in green in the revision. Thank you again for your time and effort that goes into the correction of this paper.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Hongyan Gao, Liyan Gong, Jiheng Ni, Qinglin Li
School of Agricultural Engineering
Jiangsu University
Zhenjiang, Jiangsu 212013, China
Tel.: +86-1505-292-9291
Fax: +86 511 88797338
[email protected] (H.G.)
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have revised the manuscript following the suggestions and comments.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for your comment and valuable suggestion on our manuscript. According to your opinion, we have revised the manuscript. The determination methods of total nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium content were added in line 104-111, the change has been marked in green in the revision. Thank you again for your time and effort that goes into the correction of this paper.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Hongyan Gao, Liyan Gong, Jiheng Ni, Qinglin Li
School of Agricultural Engineering
Jiangsu University
Zhenjiang, Jiangsu 212013, China
Tel.: +86-1505-292-9291
Fax: +86 511 88797338
[email protected] (H.G.)
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
