Marker-Assisted Selection of Male-Sterile and Maintainer Line in Chili Improvement by Backcross Breeding

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

The manuscript needs the following modifications:

Abstract

In general, this section is simply written and should be improved

L10-11 (Cytoplasmic genic male sterility (CGMS) is a male sterility system that uses the maternal 10 line for hybrid production): It is better that the authors mention the properties of hybrid produced by this system.

L12: The aim of the study is not clearly written and detailed. The authors should describe the method used in this study and the name of generation

L18-22: The size of all SCAR markers should insert

L19-21 (It can be concluded that the transferred CGMS and maintainer gene in chilies were successful in the early generation of the backcross method.): This sentence should be placed in the end of the abstract because it is considered as a conclusion

Keywords

The terms used for the forming of the title in the manuscript should not mention as the keywords content

Introduction

L28-29 (The capsicum species originated in North and South America and their islands, parts 28 of Africa, Europe, Antarctica, and a part of Asia.): This sentence has no sense and should be modified

In this section, the authors should add some information about the cultivation area and production of chili in Thailand based on the data available in FAO.

L37-39: This line needs a reference

L40: The authors should detail the information about the two terms: CGMS and CMS

L42 (Moreover, CGMS shows male sterility of the female 42 parent for F1 seed production): This sentence has no sense and should be modified clearly

L54: mor information about the maintainer line, restorer line and MAS should be added

L54: Some information about the importance of moleuclar markers in the MAS should be added in this section

L71-75: The aim is nor clearly written and should be modified. The authors should define the type of all lines used (A, B, and C) as sterile, maintainer, restorer

Materials and Methods

L87 (Figure 1): This content of Figure 1 should be detailed in the figure and text

L120 (Table 2): The size of amplicon should be added for each combination of primer.

L123: The duration of the incubation of the pollen grains with 1% acetocarmine should be mentioned

Results

L146 (Figure 2): The size of DNA ladder should be added

L180 (Figure 5): The results of this figure are simply written. The authors should be detailed it

The size of DNA ladder should be added in the Figures 3-5

Discussion

This section is poorly written because the authors just supported their results without any interpretation of the results. Most of the sentences are the repetition of the results

Conclusion

The authors should detail the conclusion by showing the mportance of each marker.

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer , 

Thank you very much for the lovely suggestions and comments to be the complete manuscript. I edited the manuscript following the commentaries and answered point-by-point, as shown in the attachment, and I also highlighted the editing location in the manuscript. Please see the attachment for the answer.  

Best regards, 

Jutamas Kumchai

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

 

1. Under abstract line 23 the author needs to look in to the statement which says "were highly accurate and eliminated time selection by conventional breeding" the author needs to recast this point please.

2. Starting from page 2 line 47 and throughout the entire manuscript the author used double citation format which is not acceptable, therefore, authors are advised to stick one citation format. 

3. Equally in page 2 line 75 the statement "pollen viability was confirmed the result" does not fit well authors are advised to recast that statement.

4. Similarly, in page 2 table one the word "crosse" is not complete it should be corrected. 

5. The crossing/matting design in Page 3 line 86 is blurred please a more clearer one should be used. 

6. Also in Page 8, line 188 and 189 the statement "(plant no. 3, 7, 8, 14, 22, and 24) and BC2F2A1×C3 (plant no. 9, 14, 16, and 17)" represented empty and rudimentary pollen grains, meaning that the pollen was abnormal. this statement is a bit confusing particularly pollen no. 14 was said to be empty and rudimentary please verify.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer , 

Thank you very much for the lovely suggestions and comments to be the complete manuscript. I edited the manuscript following the commentaries and answered point-by-point, as shown in the attachment, and I also highlighted the editing location in the manuscript. Please see the attachment for the answer.  

Best regards, 

Jutamas Kumchai

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have been addressed all comments