Investigating the Effects of Full-Spectrum LED Lighting on Strawberry Traits Using Correlation Analysis and Time-Series Prediction

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript investigates the effects of different light qualities ranging from 350 nm to 1000 nm on strawberry characteristics to better predict the future growth trend of strawberries under various light conditions. Spearman’s rank correlation was employed to process the data, which includes complex light quality variants and multiple characteristics of strawberries. The cultivation data was preprocessed using the CEEDMAN method and predicted using the Informer network.

The paper is interesting and can be helpful for strawberry growers. Overall, the manuscript is well-organized. However, I am missing the aim of this study. While the authors refer to the gap in the literature, which is a good point, I do not fully understand the aim. Please clearly state the aim of this paper and revise the abstract and introduction accordingly.

 

The discussion section primarily compares the findings of the current results with previous research. However, I am missing the reasons behind the facts. Please discuss the results more in-depth, providing possible explanations.

Regarding lines 9-10, I did not fully understand the sentence. Please revise it for clarity.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The paper is challenging to follow. It could be simplified for better readability and understanding. While the English is fine, the overall flow of the paper needs improvement.

Author Response

Thank you for your review, our response is in the attached PDF file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript by Lu Y et al “Investigating the Effects of Full-Spectrum LED Lighting on Strawberry Traits Using Correlation Analysis and Time-Series Prediction” is devoted to the study of light quality on the growth and development of strawberry plants. The authors performed a large amount of research. The basis was the careful planning of the experiment and control of its implementation in every detail. Control of growing conditions and data acquisition is performed at a very high level. A strength of the work is also the use of a wide range of spectral lighting. An in-depth theoretical analysis was performed, which demonstrated the reliability of the model proposed by the authors. The main results of the work are clearly presented in the form of a heat map. The result obtained in this work is of great importance for optimizing the cultivation of plants under controlled conditions. I find the quality of the present work to be very high.

There are only some questions.

 

1. The authors identified ranges of the lighting spectrum that stimulate plant growth or have a negative effect. This allows us to offer the optimal composition of the lighting spectrum. However, such an important aspect as the stage of plant development is not taken into account. Each stage of plant development (rapid leaf growth, flowering, fruiting) can have an optimal lighting spectrum. The study was carried out over a long period of time - from a few leaves to fruit harvest. The number of plants in the experiment is large. How will the lighting spectrum optima change if they are analyzed discretely in relation to the main stages of plant development?

2. In the Discussion section, the authors emphasized which plant traits are affected by a particular range of the spectrum. For example, it has been noted that UV and blue light inhibit morphometry. However, there is no hypothesis about the biological causes of the observed effects.

3. All experiments were performed using the same light intensity of 250-300 µmol m-2 s-1. This made it possible to correctly assess the effect of the quality of light on the growth and development of plants. At the same time, it is of interest what spectral optimum the ratio of the amount of light energy to a unit of crop will have. The latter is the subject of a separate study, but can be noted in the future.

Author Response

Thank you for your review, our response is in the attached PDF file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Manuscript [plants-2722637] entitled (Investigating the Effects of Full-Spectrum LED Lighting on Strawberry Traits Using Correlation Analysis and Time-Series Prediction) is well designed and explained. The manuscript has good results and written very well. But, discussion need more details.

Here, some comments:

Major comments:

1-      In Figure 8: Delete the values upper the columns, add the letters of significance according to One-Way ANOVA statistical analysis (It should be statistical analyzed with this method), then, add df, F, P values in the text of results.

2-      Lines 348-349: [These short wavelength light qualities suppressed the expansion of leaf area and delay the accumulation of biomass, which was proven in many studies [41–43]], discuss this information with details.

3-      This information [However, it also had a promotional effect on sexual proliferation and fruit quality of plants [7,48,50].] not related to the study, delete it

4-      This information [Posada et al. [53] argued the opposite], it needs more explanation

Minor comments:

1-      Lines 50 to 54: add references

2-      Line 117: indicate the section or sub-section

3-      Line 235: Delete (And)

4-      Line 326: Change (Figures 8.) to (Figure 8.)

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Please see minor comments

Author Response

Thank you for your review, our response is in the attached PDF file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript by Lu et al. focuses on correlating the wavelength of light on strawberry traits.

The authors use correlation analysis and time series prediction method, to conclude on light color on 9 parameters describing plant.

In my opinion, this research is interesting, but may not be suitable for Plants. There is definitely ver low novelty form botanics/plant physiologist point of view. A lot is known already about various light conditions influence on plant growth. It is not true (as authors seems to suggest) that usually blue or red light is tested due to limitation of experimentalist. It is just because well-established knowledge about correlation between photosynthetic efficiency and light spectrum. Basically, the main factor is chlorophyll, absorbing in red and blue. Additionally, there are phytochromes and cryptochromes - proteins absorbing in blue and green, that regulate additionally plant adaptation to light. This is completely not included into introduction or discussion.

 

In my opinion, this research would be more suitable for other journal.

Author Response

Thank you for your review, our response is in the attached PDF file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks to the authors. They have made sufficient improvements to the manuscript based on my suggestions.

Author Response

We appreciate your comments and your approval.

We wish you all the best!

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors did all my comments BUT only this should be done

- In Figure 8: Delete the values upper the columns, column and the value (upper the column) are repetition.

Author Response

Thank you for your commnet. 

We have taken your comments on board and have made changes to Figure 8 to remove the redundant values. The final format of Figure 8 is shown in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I cannot agree with the author's answer to my comment "It is not true (as authors seem to suggest) that usually blue or red light is tested due to limitation of experimentalist."

I'm not claiming, that the authors did not cite the right references. I wanted to point their attention to the fact, that the plant response to various light colors has been studied for a very long time (the first experiments of Engelmann were at 1882). And in some point, it was already found, that the most active part of the spectra is red and blue. As a consequence, in newer studies, just this part of the spectra is studied. 

This claim should be corrected. 

 

Again, the authors did not include into the discussion anything about the actual reason for plant sensitivity to light, which are proteins such as cryptochrome, phytochromes, and a pigment, chlorophyll, bound to pigment-protein complexes. Without discussing their findings in regards to well-established facts of plant biochemistry and physiology, the paper is rather a description of an algorithm/method - therefore again, in my opinion, not suitable for this Journal. 

Author Response

We appreciate your time and comments, and will continue to clarify our thoughts.

We strongly agree with your statement "And in some point, it was already found, that the most active part of the spectra is red and blue. As a consequence, in newer studies, just this part of the spectra is studied." We have reviewed extensive literature leading to similar conclusions. In our experiments, we observed that the correlation coefficient between the influence of red and blue light on plants is significant. This aligns our study with current mainstream findings.

However, our exploration did not approach from a biological and physiological standpoint for the following reasons:

1. We aimed for a quantitative method to assess the impact of different spectra on plant traits, whereas conclusions from a physiological perspective are often qualitative and abstract.
2. We believe the ultimate goal of these studies is to enhance productivity in actual production. Our research is geared towards enabling growers, who may not be versed in physiology or botany, to intuitively understand the impact of various spectra on specific plant traits.
3. Our focus has been more on methods and algorithms, aligning with the scope of the Plants journal, which encompasses discussions beyond physiology, including control, methods, and deep learning.

We understand your concern regarding the "unconventional" nature of our biological study. Nevertheless, we believe our research offers new ideas and inspiration for future work, fitting well within the inclusive and relevant scope of the Plants journal.

As the main aim of Plants journal is to "encourage scientists and research groups to publish theoretical and experimental results of research in all fundamental and applied fields of plant science.", and our research indeed focuses on applied fields. So we believe that anything that advances the field is publishable.

Round 3

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I'm satisfied with authors response