Enrichment and Diversification of the Wheat Genome via Alien Introgression
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is a very good summary of the current research status of the introgression breeding in wheat. Comprehensive literature are listed, summarized and discussed. The review will be helpful for the audience who wants to know the latest news in the field of wheat breeding based on wild relatives.
There are some minor formatting issue in the references, such as line 319 and 361.
Author Response
Suggested edits were made.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. Line 29-30: “Wheat is a major … providing ~20% of daily 29 caloric and protein intake, respectively.” Need citation?
2. Line 60-68, line 87-89: had some duplicated information, and more like a part of introduction.
3. Line 106-109: have these resistance genes been named? How much is the effect that alien resistance gene contribute to wheat and where are they located? I suggest briefly introducing several important alien genes to give the reader a deeper view of how wheat takes advantage from alien introgression.
4. Line 91-96: citation?
5. Line 164: I think the expression of “brings … deleterious genes” is inaccurate. It should be “the addition of an alien genome may lead to a deleterious effect”. If the gene is deleterious the plant will not survive, no matter with introduction.
6. Line 252-255: “… ph1 gene.” Citation?
7. Line 280-281: “in addition … and chromosomal regions”. citation?
Suggestion overall the paper: I suggest that author can use subtitles under each section for a clear point of view. For example, under the section “3. Meiotic homologous recombination-based introgression from the ancestral species and relatives into wheat”, it may be separated into A, B and D or whatever the author think it should be, and then author could introduce the history, methods and effects of several important resistance genes as successful introgression examples. For me the current version of paper has plenty of information under each section, but is a little bit hard for me to catch the point immediately. As a paper with plenty information about wheat alien introgression, a quick modification of the content structure will make the points more outstanding.
Author Response
- Line 29-30: “Wheat is a major … providing ~20% of daily 29 caloric and protein intake, respectively.” Need citation?
The 2nd part of the sentence has been deleted.
- Line 60-68, line 87-89: had some duplicated information, and more like a part of introduction.
Two different topics have been addressed in these two sections. Bringing up the polyploidy of wheat and origin of its ancestors would make the sections more readable to readers.
- Line 106-109: have these resistance genes been named? How much is the effect that alien resistance gene contribute to wheat and where are they located? I suggest briefly introducing several important alien genes to give the reader a deeper view of how wheat takes advantage from alien introgression.
The designations, origin of the resistance genes, and their resistance effects were reported and descripted in detail in the references cited. We feel unnecessary to repeat those details in this review article.
- Line 91-96: citation?
Relevant references have been cited.
- Line 164: I think the expression of “brings … deleterious genes” is inaccurate. It should be “the addition of an alien genome may lead to a deleterious effect”. If the gene is deleterious the plant will not survive, no matter with introduction.
“Deleterious” has been deleted.
- Line 252-255: “… ph1 gene.” Citation?
Relevant references have been cited.
- Line 280-281: “in addition … and chromosomal regions”. citation?
Relevant references have been cited in Line 284.
Suggestion overall the paper: I suggest that author can use subtitles under each section for a clear point of view. For example, under the section “3. Meiotic homologous recombination-based introgression from the ancestral species and relatives into wheat”, it may be separated into A, B and D or whatever the author think it should be, and then author could introduce the history, methods and effects of several important resistance genes as successful introgression examples. For me the current version of paper has plenty of information under each section, but is a little bit hard for me to catch the point immediately. As a paper with plenty information about wheat alien introgression, a quick modification of the content structure will make the points more outstanding.
This paper clearly reviews the status and progress of alien introgression in genome enrichment and diversification of wheat as stated by one other reviewer. This is a review article with relevant references cited. Adding subtitles and too many details would make the article lengthy and reduce its readability especially in this information-explosion era.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled “Enrichment and Diversification of the Wheat Genome by Alien Introgression” reviewed the research strategies and progress of alien introgressions. The topic of this manuscript is interesting and valuable for wheat improvement.
However, my major concern is that the content is common and needs further summarization. A large body of evidence showed that wheat relatives are gene pools for wheat genetic improvement, which is obvious. The methods including meiotic homologous recombination and chromosome-engineering-based approaches are also well-known.
I noted that the authors cited 154 references. Can the authors summarize some useful information, such as table of resistance genes (quality, high-yielding, drought/salt resistant), species, and others? Can the authors provide some successful cultivars examples for utilization of alien genes or chromosome fragments? Can the authors recommend potential breakthrough for wheat genetic improvement by alien genes/genome introgressions?
In addition, I suggest the manuscript includes some new technologies such as alien gene transformation, de novo domestication, genome edition, and others.
Finally, how to avoid linkage drag? How to precisely integrate alien chromosome target region or genes? Can this point be reviewed or discussed?
Author Response
The manuscript entitled “Enrichment and Diversification of the Wheat Genome by Alien Introgression” reviewed the research strategies and progress of alien introgressions. The topic of this manuscript is interesting and valuable for wheat improvement.
However, my major concern is that the content is common and needs further summarization. A large body of evidence showed that wheat relatives are gene pools for wheat genetic improvement, which is obvious. The methods including meiotic homologous recombination and chromosome-engineering-based approaches are also well-known.
This article aims to review the status and recent progress of alien introgression for genome enrichment and diversification in wheat especially in the genomics era, which will certainly interest the readers and help them understand the recent progress in this research field as stated by this reviewer. New chromosome engineering technology and pipelines have been reviewed and presented in this paper. Undoubtedly, this paper provides readers most recent updates in alien introgression for genome modification toward wheat improvement.
I noted that the authors cited 154 references. Can the authors summarize some useful information, such as table of resistance genes (quality, high-yielding, drought/salt resistant), species, and others? Can the authors provide some successful cultivars examples for utilization of alien genes or chromosome fragments? Can the authors recommend potential breakthrough for wheat genetic improvement by alien genes/genome introgressions?
The summary tables of alien genes and newly identified alien genes have been published in multiple papers cited in this review article. The gene origins, effects, and deployment were reported in those papers cited. We do not feel necessary to repeat those details in a review article because readers can find those details from the references if they want to. The potential breakthrough has been discussed in the "Challenges and perspectives" section.
In addition, I suggest the manuscript includes some new technologies such as alien gene transformation, de novo domestication, genome edition, and others.
This article aims to chromosome engineering-based alien introgression. Gene transformation, de novo domestication, genome edition, and others are not the focus of this paper.
Finally, how to avoid linkage drag? How to precisely integrate alien chromosome target region or genes? Can this point be reviewed or discussed?
This has been discussed in the "Challenges and perspectives" section.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors make significant improvement, although it does not satisfy me completely. For instance, I still think the linkage drag should be discussed. This review work provides some useful information for readers to understand alien chromosome or chromosome segments introgression.
