Overview of the Success of In Vitro Culture for Ex Situ Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Endemic and Subendemic Native Plants of Romania

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Great work. This is an interesting peer-review manuscript and the authors have collected and assessed a unique dataset using a cutting-edge methodology of the successful In Vitro culture of endemic and subendemic native plants of Romania. Overall the information presented represents valuable information in this field. The paper is generally well-written and structured. However, in my opinion the manuscript has some shortcomings in regards to clarification of novelty of the manuscript at the end of introduction and also generalizing the findings of the manuscript and suggesting propagation protocols (after assessing over 100 articles) for the other countries with similar species including Romania.   

I found minor editorials highlighted in the attached file.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

It's an exciting topic. The organization from short-term culture (initiation, multiplication, rooting, and acclimation), med-term culture, and cryopreservation seem reasonable. But as a reviewer paper, the manuscript needs to contain more than a wrap-up of references: evaluation, backgrounds, mechanisms, and perspectives,...  

Table 1 can be summarized.

Tables 2, 3, and 4 can be merged as one (or two) tables since they have redundancy. Or it can be grouped accordingly. 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

This review summarizes current data on the conservation of endangered species in Romania. The work is prepared with a high scientific standard and I recommend to publish it after referring to a few remarks.

I have 4 major comments:

1) The 'Conclusions' section needs to be improved. In present form this part is more like an introduction or/and abstract.

2) I suggest to format all tables: provide some abbreviations so the Tables will be shorter (e.g., when micro- and macroelements MS, MS alone is sufficient; Vitamins - Vit.; Sucrose - Suc, etc.). The size of the Tables affect readability.

3) Please refer to the tables more often, because there are so much data and they are not mentioned in the text at all. 

4) Each paragraph should end with a reference.

Detailed comments are included in the PDF file.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Glad to see the significantly improved manuscript. I would appreciate the authors for their hard work.