Iris typhifolia Responses to Saline–Alkali Stress: Germination, Antioxidant Activity, Hormones, and Photosynthetic Performance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The title of the work is tedious “Study on the effects of saline-alkali stress on seed germination and seedling photosynthetic characteristics of Iris typhifolia Kitag”. I recommend that authors use a more attractive title: “Iris typhifolia responses to saline-alkali stress: germination, antioxidant activity, hormones and photosynthetic performance”

 

The beginning of the abstract was truncated. “Iris typhifolia Kitag is a perennial herbaceous with high ornamental and applied value. Saline-alkali stress has become one of the factors that affect plant growth.”. The authors could say in the second moment why the study should be carried out for this important species. Why are there no studies and can Saline-alkali stress affect the plant? The first sentence is great, but improve the connection with the second, please.

 

Line 11: biochemical indices?

 

Line 24: saline-alkali area?

 

Line 65: change “Iridaceae” to “Iridaceae family”

 

In the introduction to the study; I recommend that the authors add a paragraph about aspects that may highlight the importance of the species. For example, does this species, in addition to being ornamental, have pharmacological/medicinal importance?

 

Does the species have a herbarium deposit voucher? If there is, please insert it in the methodology section in the first paragraph.

 

Throughout the text, the authors used the term “content” extensively, when in fact the correct term is “concentration” for most variables. For example, photosynthetic pigments are being used incorrectly. Review this throughout the text.

 

In results, the authors should present data on growth and dry mass. I missed this information in this study. If you have this data; add to the study. Or did they simply not do this basic analysis?

 

It was not clear to me the need to access potential germination. Is this result really important for this study, since we already have the twinning value (%)? If you remove it, it won't influence anything in my opinion.

 

In Figure 2A. Change the ordinate axis “Germination rate (%)” to “Germination (%)”.

 

In Figure 3. You have to start in A and follow the normal order of the alphabet.... It is wrong to start in C; since it is a new figure. Furthermore, in Figure 3D the unit in % does not make sense. If you're talking about radicle length, why isn't it mm or cm?

 

Whenever you start a new Figure, start with the letter A. Review this throughout the manuscript.

 

In Figure 6G and 6K. It's not content, it has to be concentration. For hormones, also make this change for concentration.

 

The conclusion of the study is very bad. It is extremely long and repeats results a lot. Please improve this.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, We are really appreciate for your excellent and professional revision of this manuscript (No. horticulturae-3023029). We have checked the manuscript according to the comments. After carefully studying, we have made corresponding changes on the manuscript and uploaded to the attachment. Hope these will make it more acceptable for publication. We eagerly await your response. If any further information are required, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely, Yuan Meng

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

 The article is very interesting. You have done extensive research that leads to significant conclusions. However, to improve the quality of the manuscript, corrections need to be made. Please see the manuscript review.

Best regards.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

We are really appreciate for your excellent and professional revision of this manuscript (No. horticulturae-3023029). We have checked the manuscript according to the comments. After carefully studying, we have made corresponding changes on the manuscript and uploaded to the attachment. Hope these will make it more acceptable for publication.

 

We eagerly await your response. If any further information are required, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Yuan Meng

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I commend your article which is now significantly improved.

 

Best regards.