The Effects of Sudden Freezing on the Biochemical Status of Bamboo Leaves: A Case Study on Nine Species on a Subtropical Plateau
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study entitled “Physiological and biochemical responses of the leaves of different bamboo types to sudden snowfall under subtropical plateau monsoon climate conditions” is quite interesting. The authors tested the cold hardiness of different bamboo cultivars that could be helpful in determining the production sustainability of certain species under freezing. The results are strong however the English language problem has made this article confusing and difficult to follow. It is very difficult to separate the results of present study from that of the previous studies in the discussion section. The article must be rechecked by an expert on the field for technical mistakes.
Therefore, the article cannot be accepted for publication.
Title:
The title must be revised to something like
“The effects of sudden freezing on the biochemical status of bamboo leaves: a case study on nine species of subtropical plateau.”
Abstract:
Line 22-23: remove “, which were”
Line 27-28: Enzymatic and non enzymatic defense system were increased! What do you mean by that? Please correct.
Line 30-31: this is contradictory to the previous sentence.
Line 32-34: not a conclusion, need revision.
Introduction:
The authors must know that the previous done research is cited in present tense and the present work is written in past tense.
Language mistakes are far too many few examples are given below.
How the literature related to biochemical changes in bamboo under cold stress differs from the research conducted in the present study?
Line 40: remove “bamboo” and replace “were” with are and remove “and”.
Line 42: replace was with are
Line 44: replace was with is
Line 47: “is posing a big threat”
Line 49: replace were with was
Line 54: replace had with has
Line 64: which physiological indicators?
Line 89: not relevant
Line: why these 9 species were chosen?
Line 101: who the study could contribute to the research on physiological damage of bamboo?
M&M
Line 114: for about 40 years? Plz rewrite
Line 134035: why the leaves were dried at two different temperatures: 105 and then 75 degrees?
Line 138: remove endogenous.
Line 175: Why was LSD test used?
There is no indication on how many plants were used to collect the leaves of each species.
What is the number of replicates for each species?
Results
There is no p-value given in the result section or in the figures. Whole results section is based on increase or decrease of a certain parameter. Tables are important component of an article.
Line 180 – 189: not a result. Please remove.
Write all the values up to one decimal.
Line 263-270: not a result please remove.
Line 295: correct the commas.
There are too many figures. Please remove some of the figures and put the data in the form of a table.
Discussion:
Line 370-378: not a discussion but conclusion. Please remove.
Line 281-392: There is no connection between the sentences and no indication that these are the previous studies. please correct.
Line 410: plays
The main problem is that there is no clear indication of previous studies and the present study.
Secondly, there is no indication that the previous studies were carried out on long term exposure to freezing and present study is on sudden freeing effect on Bamboo.
There is a lot of language mistakes. Previously established facts are always cited in present tense. E.g.
Line435: “Proline could detoxify…” must be replaced by “proline can …”
Line 450: replace highlighted with increased
Line 485-487: use present tense…
Line 488-5489: rephrase.
Line 495: What is cell membrane system?
Line 500-503: please rephrase.
Line 509-517: language mistake. Should be in present tense.
What is this figure on page 13. There is no figure caption and it is not cited anywhere.
Conclusion
Line 598: replace by with After.
Line 603: Add Significant before increase.
perspective of the study are missing.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
English language is the major problem along with the lack of clear statistical design.
Author Response
Thank you for your valuble comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsforests-2683101-peer-review-v2
Article:
Physiological and biochemical responses of the leaves of different bamboo types to sudden snowfall under subtropical plateau monsoon climate conditions.
Abstract:
The abstract did not identify the physiological and biochemical responses of the difference in resistance to cold injury in different bamboo species. The differences between the types must be noted.
Introduction:
The introduction detailed the effect of low temperatures on plant growth and the development of different bamboo types, which reduces the importance of the current study, so the authors are required to justify this.
Materials and Methods:
The authors explained "the sudden snowfall was forecasted according to the local weather bureau. The leaves of different bamboo species were firstly and rapidly sampled before the snowfall as the control, and were resampled after the snowfall", therefore, the temperatures before and after snowfall must be clarified.
Results and Discussion:
The quality of the figures is poor and the titles of the figures are missing
It is clear that the results part includes a discussion of the results while there is a separate section for the discussion. Please correct this and separate the results from the discussion part.
Conclusions:
The conclusions part is well written.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageQuality of language is fine and acceptable for publication after minor revision from the authors
Author Response
Thank you for your valuble comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe general list of used abbreviations will be useful for reader
It is not v clear if ontogeny status of investigated and compared leaves was the same
Is little bit strange for me to see the presentation of number with 2 decimals of %
Presentation of results because big number of abbreviations is little bit unclear
Author Response
Thank you for your valuble comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you very much for the opportunity to review this manuscript. The manuscript addresses an important topic.
In Figure 1, please correct the font size presenting the statistical analysis. In this format it is invisible - it overlaps the bars or the SD line.
Why are the values on the y-axis up to hundredths (it doesn't matter) or decimals - as in the case of the content of sugars, starch or proline. Additionally, please insert a space between the axis title and the unit. On the x-axis, please standardize the notation of species - either full names in all cases, or abbreviations everywhere. Please correct this on all figures.
Units in the results section should be in brackets.
Please check whether the citation format in the references section is correct.
Author Response
Thank you for your valuble comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study “Physiological and biochemical responses of the leaves of different bamboo types to sudden snowfall under subtropical plateau monsoon climate conditions” was evaluated earlier. There are improvements made but still too many language mistakes that need attention.
The article can be published after English corrections.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Dear editor,
I rejected this article earlier and still I have been assigned the same article for review again. I don't understand.
regards
Author Response
Reply:
Thank you for your valuble comments.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
