Exogenous Calcium Alleviates the Photosynthetic Inhibition and Oxidative Damage of the Tea Plant under Cold Stress
, Liyuan Xing 1, Shaobo Wu 1, Zhihui Wang 1, Chunlai Wu 1, Qiongqiong Zhou 1,* and Renliang Zhao 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this study the authors investigated the molecular mechanism of calcium-mediated cold stress response in tea plants by using exogenous calcium and a Ca2+ channel inhibitor.
The research represents an extensive study that involved a large volume of physiological and chemical measurements, and molecular analyses. In order to be published the manuscript needs several improvements. All detailed comments and suggestions can be found bellow:
- The text from lines 29-35 has no reference(s).
- I recommend you to use others recent references regarding the physiological and molecular mechanisms of tea plants under cold or other stresses, both for the introduction and discussions sections.
Malyukova LS, Koninskaya NG, Orlov YL, Samarina LS. Effects of exogenous calcium on the drought response of the tea plant (Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze). PeerJ. 2022 Aug 29;10:e13997. doi: 10.7717/peerj.13997.
Wang Y, Samarina L, Mallano AI, Tong W and Xia E (2023) Recent progress and perspectives on physiological and molecular mechanisms underlying cold tolerance of tea plants. Front. Plant Sci. 14:1145609. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1145609
Luo, J., Huang, S., Chang, Y. et al. Physiological and transcriptomic analyses reveal tea plant (Camellia sinensis L.) adapts to extreme freezing stress during winter by regulating cell wall structure. BMC Genomics 24, 558 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-023-09670-1
Fu, Q.; Cao, H.; Wang, L.; Lei, L.; Di, T.; Ye, Y.; Ding, C.; Li, N.; Hao, X.; Zeng, J.; et al. Transcriptome Analysis Reveals That Ascorbic Acid Treatment Enhances the Cold Tolerance of Tea Plants through Cell Wall Remodeling. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 10059. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241210059
- In the M&M section give some information regarding the substrate used for pre-cultured of tea seedlings.
- For a better visibility of the data (by readers), I recommend you to enlarge the images associated to Figure 1.
- In the title of Figure 1, replace „Lowercase letters represent significant differences among all treatments” with The treatments means with different (lowercase) letters are significant at p <0.05.
-In order to highlight your findings from subsection 3.1. you must also present the related values to different decreases, for instance: Cold stress significantly decreased the value of Fv/Fm with 3.71-27.5% for LJ43, 9.76-31.25% for HJY and 6.15-29.12% for XY10 cultivar. Do the same, for treatment effects.
- In the title of Figure 2, if all differences between the means are significant at p<0.01, you can remove „** represents significant differences among different treatments for the same variety”. If only the differences among different treatments within the same variety are significant at p<0.01, you must explain that the treatments means with different (lowercase) letters are significant at p <0.05.
- Also, you can enlarge the two graphs from Figure 2, for a better visibility of the data. Do the same for the images of Figure 3.
- Reformulate the title of Figure 3, as follows: Effect of CaCl2 and LaCl3 on antioxidant enzymes (POD, SOD, CAT) activities in tea plant under cold stress.
- In order to highlight the significance of differences among treatments for each temperature-period, or among different temperature-period for each treatment, you must letters in accordance with the results of ANOVA for SOD, POD and CAT activities. Do the same for data from Figure 4.
- You have to specify (in the M&M section) what software was used to make the images from Figures 3, 4.
- In the title of Figure 5 you must reformulate the text “** represent significant differences at P < 0.01 among all treatments” as follows: ** represent significant differences at P < 0.01 compared to H2O treatment. I consider that it would be more relevant to express the significance of differences between treatment using letters, as in Figures 1, 2.
- In the R&D section there are no comments regarding the Figure 6.
- In the Conclusions the perspective part is missing; please describe perspective statements for directing further studies.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Minor editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear author/s
The development of the work is in general terms easily understandable, and most results are in line with what has been reported in other species exposed to cold stress. However, several issues must be reviewed before the manuscript can be considered suitable for publication.
On one hand, a careful revision of the text by an English speaker is required. Despite writing corrections and/or modifications have been suggested along the text, some paragraphs need to be fully reformulated. This is particularly necessary in the section describing changes in gene expression. Moreover, a clear description of the statistical procedures used for the analysis of some data, but particularly of gene expression is required. Similarly, some methodological aspects must be clarified to properly understand how some figures were generated, such as Fig.1B or Fig.4.
Finally, the discussion of some data should be revised and expanded to enrich the explanation of some of the observed responses.
Please see the attached revised file for specific comments on these and other issues.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Please see comments to the editor
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors and editor: I am grateful to the authors for considering most of the comments performed in my former revision. However, despite the text has been significantly improved, there are still several wording issues that must be corrected before it can be considered suitable for publication. On the other hand, questions related to the statistical analyses performed, as well as the description of some of the results have not been adequately addressed. For these reasons I consider that a major revision of the new manuscript is still required. Please refer to the attached revised file for detailed comments on these and related subjects.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Moderate English edition is required
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
