Elemental Profiles of Wild Thymus L. Plants Growing in Different Soil and Climate Conditions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this paper, manuscript ID applsci-1643889, a comparison regarding the elemental analysis of two species of plants from Thymus L. species is presented. The work covers a wide range of elements assessed through direct current arc atomic emission spectrometry. The results are interesting and the distribution of elements from soil in the plants roots, stems, leaves and flowers might be of general interest, since thyme has culinary and medicinal purposes. However, several points should be addressed before considering publication:
- A thorough reading and proofing of the manuscript is necessary since repetitive sentences and phrases were identified in the manuscript. Also, editing of the English language is highly recommended.
- lines 16-19: The study was to set and compare the elements in organs of wild thyme for different soil and climatic conditions the study was to set and compare the elements in organs of wild thyme for different soil and climatic conditions.
- lines 20-21: The 24 elements, including Si, in soils, roots, stems, leaves and flowers simultaneously found by atomic emission spectrometry. - verb is missing
- line 35: Since plants participate in the migration of chemical elements in natural ecosystems ‑ please rephrase, the same sentence is in the beginning of the paragraph, line 29
- line 55: the word grass is unclear
- line 63: the word derived is improperly used. Suggestion: obtained, extracted
- line 65: endocrine and tumour disease - please rephrase
- line 103: fabricated on a plane - unclear, please rephrase
- line 222: please provide units for 400 and 93
- lines 354-357: repetition of the sentence in lines 341-343
- lines 361- 363: phrases from the template, please remove
- supplementary material: in table S2 some values are presented and no units for those values
- The abstract mentions ‘It is established that Si is a necessary element of plant’ (lines 22-23). No evidence supporting this statement is present in the manuscript, so this should be removed or rephrased.
- The aim of the study is very briefly described and insufficiently. The authors do not mention the importance of the elements assessed in this work and why were they assessed. Also, no mention of the study of elements distribution in the plants organs is found in the aim of this work.
- Authors should consider discussing how do the toxic elements concentration found in the two thyme species correlate with the maximum levels allowed for these toxic elements in food and/or herbal supplements.
- Table 2 is very hard to read and follow since it is spread across two pages. Perhaps a landscape layout of the table would be easier to look at. Also, a narrowing down of the number of columns could be considered: reuniting column with references [25,26] with [31] since both are from the same species in Spain; column with ref. [15] could be removed from the table and mentioned in the text. Also, please review the number of decimals presented in Table 2 (i.e., no need to present decimals when giving numbers like 8006.06).
- The discussion presented in lines 310-328 is a literature review of the importance of elements and correlation with the organic components of plants. These statements do not match the results presented in this paper, thus it should be removed from this section.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The title and content of the article do not exactly match, as the soil type and climatic condition are not discussed (properly presented) in the article.
The material and method do not fully reflect the large amount of work the authors have put into this material. It was not recorded (detailed) how many samples were measured for element content.
They worked with certified material samples that are not very well-known internationally. The reviewer may take note of the results obtained with local material samples, but the results of the analysis of certified material samples from one or two other countries (e.g.: USA, EU) are missing in my opinion.
The authors do not discuss the way of washing the roots or what the root mass was like at face value, that is visually and in proportions: in relation to the above-ground section and the root mass (a photograph taken of it would be informative).
They don’t mention what they mean by the element content of the soil, is it all element content or something else?
What were the two soil types like?
In the material and method section, there is a need for clarification. The moisture content of what is indicated by the data?
Many certified material samples are mentioned but only the ones used for the measurements needs to be presented, making this change could modify the material and method. This would improve largely the understanding of the content.
Table S2 does not provide the measurement units for element concentrations.
Potassium data are not shown in Figures 1 and 3. Why? However, line 237 24 elements are given.
In the discussion, I miss the evaluation of elemental profiles corresponding to the title. Yet this could be an important part of characterizing wild Thymus L. plants and thus providing basic data. After making this modification it would not be so surprising that only silicon is highlighted out of the 24 elements examined.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have taken into consideration the suggestions and comments and improved the manuscript.
The authors have added lines 278-280 into the new manuscript. The phrase 'It usually causes data on the silicon content in plants are not available' is not clear.
A minor remark, throughout the manuscript the word 'Thymus' is written sometimes in italic or regular font.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for the helpful hints.
Point 1: The authors have added lines 278-280 into the new manuscript. The phrase 'It usually causes data on the silicon content in plants are not available' is not clear.
Response 1: We tried to explain why information of Si-content in plants is missing for a lot of articles. We changed the sentence “It usually causes data on the silicon content in plants are not available“ by “The factors mentioned above usually cause the exclusion of silicon from the analyte list”.
Point 2: A minor remark, throughout the manuscript the word 'Thymus' is written sometimes in italic or regular font.
Response 2: Thanks for the comments. We checked the written word “Thymus” again and corrected it.
Reviewer 2 Report
As I indicated in my previous review, it is not necessary to present all the certified reference material - it is enough to include the ones that are featured in the supplemet.
In line 486. why is the title written in capital letters ?
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for interesting suggestions, useful recommendations and discussions for improving our manuscript.
Point 1: As I indicated in my previous review, it is not necessary to present all the certified reference material - it is enough to include the ones that are featured in the supplemet.
Response 1: Since this information can be useful for research analysts to build calibrations for the direct methods of plant analysis such as LIBS, NAA, X-ray spectrometry, etc. Therefore, we presented CRMs that were used to quality control of calibration and the quality accuracy of the results obtained (in accordingly ISO 17025)
Point 2: In line 486. why is the title written in capital letters?
Response 2: We corrected it
