Variance Components, Correlation and Path Coefficient Analysis of Morpho-Physiological and Yield Related Traits in Spider Plant (Gynandropsis gynandra (L.) Briq.) under Water-Stress Conditions

Reviewer 1

Abstract, Results, Discussion and Conclusion

1

Keywords: the manuscript still remains purely descriptive and no experimental questions were defined in the study objectives.

Corrections made as suggested. Last paragraph has been improved to address the experimental questions in the study’s objective.

Abstract, Results, Discussion and Conclusion

2

For example, why is it important to establish the qualitative and quantitative differences between spider plant cultivars

We agree. We have removed the qualitative section as it does not address the objective of the study. The goal is to identify traits that can be used to select for leaf yield under both mild and severe stress conditions.

Abstract, Results, Discussion and Conclusion

3

It's not clear to me if a cultivar is more resistant to water stress. This aspect should be mostly discussed on the basis of the collected results.

We have tried to address this question as requested. We are mainly interested in traits that can aid in selecting drought tolerant accessions.

Reviewer 2

Title

1

L4-5:Why should emphasize both water-stress and non-water-stress conditions in the title? Why not just simply use "under water stress or under drought stress", because there will be a control (non-stress) always.

The title has been changed as suggested

Abstract

2

L18: Don't understand what it means by "the magnitude of the genetic parameters....".

Corrections made as follows:  We have rephrased line 18. The word has been removed.

Abstract

3

L20-25: The part of detail statistics parameters should move to the section of M&M.

Some improvement has been made and part of the detail statistics has been removed.

Abstract

4

L20-30: Very difficult to understand and thus needs to be rewritten.

Correction made as suggested. Line 20-30 has been rewritten.

All sections

5

L34-35: It is very strange because it is almost common sense and needs not to be proved by experiments about the sentence "leaves per plant had a strong to moderate positive correlation with leaf yield".

Correction addressed as requested.

Materials and Methods

6

Figure 1: The quality is not satisfactory. The resolution, overall layout, and focus all should be improved.

Figure one has been removed from the manuscript.

7

Figure 2: Very poor quality and significant effects should be added, ex. different letters between means to show they are significant.

Correction made. Figure 2 has been removed from the manuscript.

8

Too many data and also tables and thus need to be organized or move some minor parts to the supplementary information.

Correction made. We have removed the qualitative section as it does not address the study.

9

Overall, this manuscript is very difficult to digest because the authors did not organize well and the writing skill is poor.

Correction made as requested. Organization of manuscript and writing skill has been improved.

Discussion and Conclusion

10

Discussion and Conclusion section needs proper improvement

Some improvement made.

Reviewer 1

Abstract

1

Keywords: The keywords "path analysis" and "correlation" are not suitable because this is a study of plant stress physiology but not a study focusing on the method of statistics. The keywords should point out the most important theme of this study such as morpho-physiological traits, water regimes, genotypes, etc.

Corrections made as suggested. Revised keywords are: Morpho-physiological traits, water regimes, genotypes, variance components, trait association, heritability, genetic advance

Methods

2

First of all, I have noticed that the experiment has two replications, but normally it needs at least three replicates for each treatment. In this study, there are three water regimes, and they should all conduct three replication for collecting data to further statistical analysis including ANOVA.

We agree. We did two replications in each water regime, and the experiment was also replicated in four growing environments, and this generated more data thus improving the precision of the estimates.

Results

3

There is a lack of scale bars in figure 1 and it seems the quality of all photos is low.

Quality of figures and resolution has been improved

4

In Table 8, column 1, PHOT should be PHOTO.

Correction has been made

Abstract, Results, Discussion and Conclusion

5

The authors concluded that "NL was the most important contributing trait for improving leaf yield 27 under drought-stressed conditions, based on correlation and path analyses". However, based on statistics, LL, RWC, and PHOTO all have a significant effect (***) on LY. According to statistics, their effects are the same.

This has been corrected including in the Abstract

6

The authors should describe their results and conclusion according to the data of statistics throughout the manuscript.

This is related to the above. Corrections have been made throughout the document.

7

A conclusive graph or a flowchart could enhance the readability and attractiveness to the readers.

We have addressed this by presenting some of the data e.g., correlation and path analysis data, in the form of graphs.

Reviewer 2

Title

1

Article should be changed

The title has been changed, but we are not sure of what the expectation of the Reviewer is as there was no suggestion made.

Abstract

2

Line 18-19: Plz mention control, mild and severe water stress % value

Corrections made as follows:

severe drought (30% field capacity), intermediate drought (50% field capacity), and well-watered conditions (100% field capacity)

3

Abstract section needs improvement

Some improvement has been made

Keywords

4

Add more/ significant keywords

Correction made as suggested

All sections

5

Please check typos and correct it entire the MS

We have checked grammatical and typos, and corrected the entire manuscript

Materials and Methods

6

Line 141-143: Add more details about photosynthesis analysis with instrumental details

Photosynthesis analysis has been adequately described in the Materials and Methods section

7

Photosynthesis observation time?

Correction made - 08.00 to 12.00 noon

8

Leaf position/ number of photosynthetic analysis?

Correction made. We used the third half-formed leaf from the plant's tip

9

Line 238-251: Need improvement

Correction made

Discussion and Conclusion

10

Discussion and Conclusion section needs proper improvement

Some improvement made.

Reviewer 1

Abstract

1

Keywords: The keywords "path analysis" and "correlation" are not suitable because this is a study of plant stress physiology but not a study focusing on the method of statistics. The keywords should point out the most important theme of this study such as morpho-physiological traits, water regimes, genotypes, etc.

Corrections made as suggested. Revised keywords are: Morpho-physiological traits, water regimes, genotypes, variance components, trait association, heritability, genetic advance

Methods

2

First of all, I have noticed that the experiment has two replications, but normally it needs at least three replicates for each treatment. In this study, there are three water regimes, and they should all conduct three replication for collecting data to further statistical analysis including ANOVA.

We agree. We did two replications in each water regime, and the experiment was also replicated in four growing environments, and this generated more data thus improving the precision of the estimates.

Results

3

There is a lack of scale bars in figure 1 and it seems the quality of all photos is low.

Quality of figures and resolution has been improved

4

In Table 8, column 1, PHOT should be PHOTO.

Correction has been made

Abstract, Results, Discussion and Conclusion

5

The authors concluded that "NL was the most important contributing trait for improving leaf yield 27 under drought-stressed conditions, based on correlation and path analyses". However, based on statistics, LL, RWC, and PHOTO all have a significant effect (***) on LY. According to statistics, their effects are the same.

This has been corrected including in the Abstract

6

The authors should describe their results and conclusion according to the data of statistics throughout the manuscript.

This is related to the above. Corrections have been made throughout the document.

7

A conclusive graph or a flowchart could enhance the readability and attractiveness to the readers.

We have addressed this by presenting some of the data e.g., correlation and path analysis data, in the form of graphs.

Reviewer 2

Title

1

Article should be changed

The title has been changed, but we are not sure of what the expectation of the Reviewer is as there was no suggestion made.

Abstract

2

Line 18-19: Plz mention control, mild and severe water stress % value

Corrections made as follows:

severe drought (30% field capacity), intermediate drought (50% field capacity), and well-watered conditions (100% field capacity)

3

Abstract section needs improvement

Some improvement has been made

Keywords

4

Add more/ significant keywords

Correction made as suggested

All sections

5

Please check typos and correct it entire the MS

We have checked grammatical and typos, and corrected the entire manuscript

Materials and Methods

6

Line 141-143: Add more details about photosynthesis analysis with instrumental details

Photosynthesis analysis has been adequately described in the Materials and Methods section

7

Photosynthesis observation time?

Correction made - 08.00 to 12.00 noon

8

Leaf position/ number of photosynthetic analysis?

Correction made. We used the third half-formed leaf from the plant's tip

9

Line 238-251: Need improvement

Correction made

Discussion and Conclusion

10

Discussion and Conclusion section needs proper improvement

Some improvement made.