Extracellular Fragmented Self-DNA Displays Biostimulation of Lettuce in Soilless Culture
, Miguel Urrestarazu 1, Ireri A. Carbajal-Valenzuela 2, José Barroso Ramos 1, Raúl Ortega 1, Isabel Miralles 1 and Ramón Gerardo Guevara-González 2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe Authors (Cunha-Chiamolera at al) have evaluated Extracellular DNA (eDNA) and its mechanisms of function in lettuce plant metabolism as a potential alternative to be used as a biostimulant material.
The topic is quite new in horticultural science and the information from this manuscript can help our understanding about the effect of Extracellular DNA (eDNA) in lettuce plant metabolism.
In general, the manuscript is well written, although some minor improvements are necessary.
1. Abstract: In this section it would be better to introduce the effect of the treatments in percentage of increase/decrease.
2. Line 70. In the Introduction section the relevance of lettuce as important crop should be introduced.
3. The importance of soilless systems should be better introduced in the Introduction section.
4. Line 130. Add the City and State where the instrument was made in.
5. Line 137. Add the City and State where the instrument was made in.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer X Comments
The Authors (Cunha-Chiamolera at al) have evaluated Extracellular DNA (eDNA) and its mechanisms of function in lettuce plant metabolism as a potential alternative to be used as a biostimulant material.
The topic is quite new in horticultural science and the information from this manuscript can help our understanding about the effect of Extracellular DNA (eDNA) in lettuce plant metabolism.
In general, the manuscript is well written, although some minor improvements are necessary.
- Abstract: In this section it would be better to introduce the effect of the treatments in percentage of increase/decrease.
Response 1: This was reviewed.
- Line 70. In the Introduction section the relevance of lettuce as important crop should be introduced.
Response 2: The introduction was rewritten
- The importance of soilless systems should be better introduced in the Introduction section.
Response 3: Several phrases were incorporated in the new version
- Line 130. Add the City and State where the instrument was made in.
Response 4: Done
- Line 137. Add the City and State where the instrument was made in.
Response 5: Done
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn manuscript, the authors examined the effects of five self-eDNA treatments on the fertigation and growth parameters of lettuce in soilless cultivation environments, and found a quadratic fit between uptake and production parameters to self-eDNA dosage. And it was pointed out that the highest values of fertigation uptake (water, nitrate and potassium) and growth were observed at doses of 0.25 and 2.5 mg self-eDNA. This is an interesting study that explores the effectiveness of using eDNA as a biostimulant in soilless cultivation environments based on self DNA as a biological stimulus, which provides a reference example for studying the beneficial effects of self eDNA as a biostimulant and its cost-effectiveness. However, there are many issues that should be addressed to facilitate reading and make the information useful:
1. About the Abstract, some important results and conclusions are not reflected in the abstract, such as self-eDNA applied on Electrical conductivity (EC) and pH. In addition, the authors also have many descriptions of the method in the abstract. So, it is suggested that the authors rewrite the abstract.
2. About the Introduction, it is suggested that the authors deleted these sentences without involving comments on eDNA in Lin44-49, Lin80-82.
3. About the Results and discussion part 3.1, please change the subtitle of 3.1 to Yield of Self-DNA Extraction. And it is suggested that the authors supplemented the relevant experimental results: 1. Add a gel image of DNA extraction to indicate the band size of 1000 base pairs (bp) of self-eDNA. 2. Supplement the concentration and content of the extracted DNA.
4. About the Results and discussion part 3.2-3.5, it is suggested that the authors rewrite the sub-title of result. e.g. Effect of self-eDNA biostimulation on lettuce fertigation uptake parameters/ Effect of self-eDNA biostimulation on lettuce growth parameters
5. About Figures in the text, please the authors update all the images with the high definition graphic version and indicate the units of measurement for different coordinate axes.
In addition, the English writing needs to be improved. There are numerous grammatical errors and unconventional expressions.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer X Comments
In manuscript, the authors examined the effects of five self-eDNA treatments on the fertigation and growth parameters of lettuce in soilless cultivation environments, and found a quadratic fit between uptake and production parameters to self-eDNA dosage. And it was pointed out that the highest values of fertigation uptake (water, nitrate and potassium) and growth were observed at doses of 0.25 and 2.5 mg self-eDNA. This is an interesting study that explores the effectiveness of using eDNA as a biostimulant in soilless cultivation environments based on self DNA as a biological stimulus, which provides a reference example for studying the beneficial effects of self eDNA as a biostimulant and its cost-effectiveness. However, there are many issues that should be addressed to facilitate reading and make the information useful:
- About the Abstract, some important results and conclusions are not reflected in the abstract, such as self-eDNA applied on Electrical conductivity (EC) and pH. In addition, the authors also have many descriptions of the method in the abstract. So, it is suggested that the authors rewrite the abstract.
Response 1: This was reviewed.
- About the Introduction, it is suggested that the authors deleted these sentences without involving comments on eDNA in Lin44-49, Lin80-82.
Response 2: This comment were attended in the new version
- About the Results and discussion part 3.1, please change the subtitle of 3.1 to Yield of Self-DNA Extraction. And it is suggested that the authors supplemented the relevant experimental results: 1. Add a gel image of DNA extraction to indicate the band size of 1000 base pairs (bp) of self-eDNA. 2. Supplement the concentration and content of the extracted DNA.
Response 3: The figure to clarify was enclosed in the new version
- About the Results and discussion part 3.2-3.5, it is suggested that the authors rewrite the sub-title of result. e.g. Effect of self-eDNA biostimulation on lettuce fertigation uptake parameters/ Effect of self-eDNA biostimulation on lettuce growth parameters
Response 4: This was attended in the new version
- About Figures in the text, please the authors update all the images with the high definition graphic version and indicate the units of measurement for different coordinate axes.
Response 5: The abscissa and ordinate units of the graphs as well as their parameters are now described in the graphs and legend.
In addition, the English writing needs to be improved. There are numerous grammatical errors and unconventional expressions.
A great number of errors were corrected in the new version
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled "Extracellular Fragmented Self-DNA Displays Biostimulation of Lettuce by Soilless Culture" is a very interesting study. This research outcome is very interesting for readers and teachers. However, the following points can be improved for better understanding for the researcher and reader:" 1. please describe in detail each step of the methodology. 2. Methodology can also be elaborated with a flowchart, which could help the researcher easily understand. 3. Please improve the discussion and provide logical facts
Author Response
Response to Reviewer X Comments
The manuscript entitled "Extracellular Fragmented Self-DNA Displays Biostimulation of Lettuce by Soilless Culture" is a very interesting study. This research outcome is very interesting for readers and teachers. However, the following points can be improved for better understanding for the researcher and reader:"
- please describe in detail each step of the methodology.
- Methodology can also be elaborated with a flowchart, which could help the researcher easily understand.
Response 1 and 2: A figure to clarify 1 and 2 point of the methodology was incorporated in the new version
- Please improve the discussion and provide logical facts
Response 3: Some consideration about logical facts were considered in the new version
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThanks the authors' response. In the revised version, the authors have updated and supplied some results and conclusions to improve the quality of this manuscript, and the concerns of the reviewer has been clarified. So, I agree to accept this manuscript.
