Structure and Function of Blueberry Fruit and Flowers: Stomata, Transpiration and Photoassimilation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The present work was conducted to investigate the different structures of blueberry flower and fruit by LT-SEM, to explain their contribution to CO₂ exchange and transpiration to help clarify some of the unresolved points of blueberry fruit physiology 1) climacteric character, 2) uptake or efflux of CO₂ and 3) the absence or presence of the stomata of its floral organs. In result was established that Blueberry fruit exhibits stomata in the dense wax cover (‘bloom’) and hidden on the distal part of the ovary in between and underneath the corolla, contrary to Iiterature reports up to now.

 The manuscript follows the structure recommended in “Author guidelines” of “Horticulturae”. The research methods applied are appropriate and permit achieving the objectives of the study. The results are clearly described and presented in corresponding figures and tables.

 The following recommendations can be made:

 In the “Abstract” add the objective of the study, after the description of methods: “Methods: In the present study, berries were dewaxed and the sepals /corolla removed for stomatal counts and studied by LT-SEM to examine the different structures of the blueberry flower and fruit to explain their contribution to CO₂ exchange and transpiration in order to clarify the above described discrepancies.”

 In the “Introduction” to give information about the physiology of the processes indicated at the beginning of this section, namely the climacteric character and the transpiration and uptake of CO₂ by the fruit, and the role of these processes in the fruit formation, and only then to state the exceptions with blueberry fruit.

 In conclusion, this manuscript is recommended for publication in “Horticulturae” after consideration the comments made.

 

Author Response

Dear anonymous first reviewer,

many thanks for your thorough report and thoughtful comments. Please find the revision of the issues raised enclosed for your perusal.

1) In the abstract, the objective was added- thank you- good idea.

2) The Introduction is expanded to explain the physiological background , i.e. carbon partitioning from source to sink and particularly fruit photosynthesis, where net CO2 efflux (respiration) dominates in such a sink organ and stomata are scarce but relevant to transpirational pull to provide nutrient intake.

Best wishes

M. Blanke

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have carefully read the manuscript submitted for evaluation, entitled "Structure and function of sepals of blueberry fruit," because the existing literature does not provide sufficient information about the ontogeny of blueberries and the full development of quality traits in the fruits of various Vaccinium corymbosum cultivars. It is commonly known that the fruits of the V. corymbosum cultivar exhibit a diverse growth rate and a similar time of initiation of quality traits in the fruit macro- and micromorphology as well as anatomy. The issue of the presence or absence of stomata on fruits is still under discussion. In light of the above data, I consider the research topic undertaken by the author to be important.

It is regrettable that the paper in its current form suffers from numerous shortcomings and is therefore not suitable for publication. Firstly, the abstract should be rewritten according to the journal's formatting guidelines. It is unnecessary to divide it into background, methods, and results sections. Additionally, it would be beneficial to select keywords that align with the content of the article and facilitate its online searchability. Secondly, the introductory chapter requires substantial rewriting and supplementation. The current format of the paper is deficient in terms of providing sufficient information regarding the scientific issue and motivating the reader to engage with the article's content. It should be supplemented with basic information regarding the fruit of Vaccinium macro- and micromorphology and blueberry fruit development. It is necessary to reformat Figure 1. The individual photographs must be labeled with letters (e.g., a, b, c, d) and include detailed explanations in the figure description. The discussion section is the most important chapter in the article. In this case, it is more of a summary than a professional discussion with data from other authors. It is also necessary to improve this chapter. Moreover, in my opinion, the results of this research should be published in the form of a Communication rather than an Article.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript should be thoroughly checked for English language and writing errors.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer no 2,

thank you very much for taking the time and efforts to review this study  and for finding the work an important contribution. In the revised version,

a) the abstract is re-formatted/re-structured and no longer divided into background, methods etc.

b) more appropriate keywords have been added

c) The Introdction is re-written and supplemented with more information on the features of fruit photosynthesis and role of stomata and transpiration for a fruit

d) the micrographs in the photomount are labeled a to f

e) More information is added in the discussion and comparisons with the situation in grape berry, strawberry and avocado . 

f) the type of contribution changed from article to Short Communication, which is termed "Brief Report" in MDPI horticulturae.

g) The English has been revised by a native speaker

The changes are marked in blue in the revised version.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study identified the ovary as a minor source of, but the sepals as the dominant source of both CO₂ and H₂O exchange of the blueberry. It means that the blueberry is the exception in terms of net CO₂ uptake of a fruit, which was found here to be due to the large chlorophyll content and great number of stomata of the sepals but not the ovary.

The results of the study are innovative, and the manuscript can be published with major revisions:

Figure 1 should be arranged on the same page with “abcd” representation should be indicated in all the small figures, and add bars.

Table 1 and Table 2 should be arranged on the same page;

Pay attention to the upper and lower superscripts of the text and the separator symbols, see the yellow mark.

Line 175 fur?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Acceptable after a major revision.

Author Response

Dear anonymous reviewer 3,

many thanks for taking the time and reviewing the short manuscript on the role of sepals for blueberry fruit CO2 assimilation and classifying it as innovative. PLease find the revised version enclose d in which I

• the photomount is on o n e - the same - page
• the same for the tables
• corrected the super/subscripts
• and corrected the typo in former line 175.
•  
• Some of the super/subscripts originate from conversions so I will will check the final pageproofs.
• Thank you again for taking the time and your efforts
• M. Blanke.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Compared to the original version, the authors have significantly improved the manuscript. This is a much better version of the manuscript than the previous submission. I have no further comments. My recommendation is for the publication of this brief report.

Author Response

Dear reviewer #2,

many thanks for all your input and for finding my revised version suitable for publication and accepted as a short communication ("Brief report").

Many thanks for taking the time

M. Blanke

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study identified the ovary as a minor source of, but the sepals as the dominant source of both CO₂ and H₂O exchange of the blueberry. It means that the blueberry is the exception in terms of net CO₂ uptake of a fruit, which was found here to be due to the large chlorophyll content and great number of stomata of the sepals but not the ovary.

The results of the study are innovative, and the manuscript can be published with major revisions:

Figure 1 should be arranged on the same page with “abcd” representation should be indicated in all the small figures, and add bars.

Table 1 and Table 2 should be arranged on the same page;

Pay attention to the upper and lower superscripts of the text and the separator symbols, see the yellow mark.

Line 175 fur?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

No comment

Author Response

Dear reviewer #3,

many thanks for alerting me to the various typos from the abstract to the reference section- The text was amended and the corrections are highlighted in yellow in the revised version for your perusal.

Many thanks for taking the time and your efforts

M. Blanke

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

There are some mini errors in the text. After they are revised, the manuscript can be accepted.

line 8, delete i), ii), c).

Fig.2, Add “a” and “b”, note the superscript of the letter in the image above;

The separating symbol between numbers in the manuscript and references is indicated by a "–".

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very, very much for your careful reading and correction of the typos, which partly accumulated during the revision stages. The three corrections are marked in green

In line 8, i), ii) and c) are deleted, which originated from the first draft and separating sections within the abstract

In figure 2, "a" and "b" are added without marking them in green

The separating symbol between numbers is used, but might have been changed by the uploading/editorial process into this "elongated dash".. 

Best wishes and many thanks for the continued support and patience

Michael Blanke