Autochthonous Rose Hybrid Rosa pendulina × spinosissima Overshines Main Genotype Rosa pendulina in the Biochemical Characteristics of Their Hips

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors reported that the rips of hybrid Rosa pendulina × spinosissima are much better than pendulina by comparing the ABA, organic acid and flavonoids, and so on. Generally, the manuscript's concept is good and the data is enough. However, I feel that there are some main issues should be addressed.

First, the section of results lacks the subtilltes, which leads to the presentation is not very clear to the readers.

Second, why the corresponding data is lacking in spinosissima? These data need to added in the manuscript.

For lines 22-23, the conclusion of "... still high enough to be used in human consumption" is not supported by the data persented in this study. Some other data should by provided .

Last, the resolution of the pictures is low, which should be replaced with higher ones.

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Reviewer 1,

Thank you for your review of the paper "Autochthonous rose hybrid Rosa pendulina × spinosissima overshines main genotype Rosa pendulina in the biochemical characteristics of their hips" and useful comments.

We have read the queries and corrected the paper according to your suggestions. We have answered the comments, which we believe have helped us to improve the reports of our study for publication in Horticulturae. For your convenience, we've marked the changes we've made in the article and labeled them R1. Additionally, based on your comment, the entire article has been re-checked by a proofreader.

Point 1: First, the section of results lacks the subtitles, which leads to the presentation is not very clear to the readers.

Response 1: I have added subtitles to the results.

Point 2: Second, why the corresponding data is lacking in spinosissima? These data need to added in the manuscript.

Response 2: We tried to collect the hips of R. spinosissima as well, but unfortunately the mentioned plants did not bloom in that year and the bushes of this species were without fruits in the fall of 2020. Since our research work is tied to nature, we do not have an influence on what the conditions will be in a given year and, consequently, what the development of the flowers/fruits will be. We also mentioned this problem in the article.

Point 3: For lines 22-23, the conclusion of "... still high enough to be used in human consumption" is not supported by the data presented in this study. Some other data should by provided.

Response 3: The corrections have been made to the article.

Point 4: Last, the resolution of the pictures is low, which should be replaced with higher ones.

Response 4: The pictures have been replaced.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The research presented in the article substantiates the search for genus Rosa L. valuable species or their hybrids, focusing on the biological active compounds of the fruits. Such topics is especially relevant today when people's attention to health-promoting biochemical compounds of plant origin is increasing. On the other hand, the article itself has a number of methodological and results presentation problems that need to be corrected.

The title corresponds to the presented investigations.

The Abstract is adequate and contains short information on results of this study. On the other hand, the statement " We have conclude that the content of bioactive compounds in analyzed hips is still high enough to be used in human consumption" (p.1, lines 22-24) is declarative and non-specific. The abstract should also indicate the methods used.

Most of the keywords are adequate. I would suggest to remove the keyword "hybridization".  This article does not present Rosa sp. species crosses. In my opinion, this keyword does not reflect the content of the article.

The Introduction. In this section, different references were described, the aim of investigations was formulated. However, the state-of-the-art and significance of investigations was not covered. It could be the application of innovative methods, search for new compounds etc. Determination of ascorbic acid, total phenolic compounds by routine methods are not considered to be innovative studies. In my opinion, it was worth to formulate the hypotheses in this chapter, taking into account the specifics of this study.

Materials and Methods. Research material and methods as well as statistical methods are presented. The collection of rose hips samples for research is not explained. It is not clear how the species and its hybrids were identified. In general, hybrids can vary greatly, especially if mother plant and the father plant are different. Morphological descriptions are mentioned (p. 2, lines 90-91) but not demonstrated. This is a fundamental drawback when there is no clear separation between the two groups of plants studied.

Results. The results of the study are presented in 3 Figures and 3 Tables which visualize the research. The qualitative and quantitative composition of phenolic compounds is presented in sufficient detail. In this section, the authors state that only 1 anthocyanin has been identified. This is a false statement. Rosa hips contain more anthocyanins: cyanidin-3,5-diclucoside and paeonidin-3-glucoside (Noruzov, 2005). Thus, in the methods section, it should be stated that total anthocyanins were determined using cyanidin-3-glucoside as a chemical standard.

The Discussion. In this section, the authors compare the obtained results with the data of other scientists in detail. However, the innovativeness of the conducted research was not justified in this section. Since the hypotheses were not formulated, the discussion is essentially narrative in nature.

The Conclusions are focussed on the issues raised in the study. Again, the same narrative statement as in the abstract (compare p. 1, lines 22-24 and p. 10, lines 350-351) is completely pointless.

Note. The names of plants, when they are mentioned for the first time in the text, must be written with the author's name, for example Rosa canina L., R. gallica L. etc.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewer 2,

Thank you for your review of the paper "Autochthonous rose hybrid Rosa pendulina × spinosissima overshines main genotype Rosa pendulina in the biochemical characteristics of their hips" and useful comments.

We have read the queries and corrected the paper according to your suggestions. We have answered the comments, which we believe have helped us to improve the reports of our study for publication in Horticulturae. For your convenience, we've marked the changes we've made in the article and labeled them R2.

Point 1: The Abstract is adequate and contains short information on results of this study. On the other hand, the statement " We have concluded that the content of bioactive compounds in analyzed hips is still high enough to be used in human consumption" (p.1, lines 22-24) is declarative and non-specific. The abstract should also indicate the methods used.

Response 1: The corrections have been made to the text.

Point 2: Most of the keywords are adequate. I would suggest to remove the keyword "hybridization".  This article does not present Rosa sp. species crosses. In my opinion, this keyword does not reflect the content of the article.

Response 2: The keyword has been removed.

Point 3: The Introduction. In this section, different references were described, the aim of investigations was formulated. However, the state-of-the-art and significance of investigations was not covered. It could be the application of innovative methods, search for new compounds etc. Determination of ascorbic acid, total phenolic compounds by routine methods are not considered to be innovative studies. In my opinion, it was worth to formulate the hypotheses in this chapter, taking into account the specifics of this study.

Response 3: The corrections have been made to the text.

Point 4: Materials and Methods. Research material and methods as well as statistical methods are presented. The collection of rose hips samples for research is not explained. It is not clear how the species and its hybrids were identified. In general, hybrids can vary greatly, especially if mother plant and the father plant are different. Morphological descriptions are mentioned (p. 2, lines 90-91) but not demonstrated. This is a fundamental drawback when there is no clear separation between the two groups of plants studied.

Response 4: The corrections have been made to the text.

Point 5: Results. The results of the study are presented in 3 Figures and 3 Tables which visualize the research. The qualitative and quantitative composition of phenolic compounds is presented in sufficient detail. In this section, the authors state that only 1 anthocyanin has been identified. This is a false statement. Rosa hips contain more anthocyanins: cyanidin-3,5-diclucoside and paeonidin-3-glucoside (Noruzov, 2005). Thus, in the methods section, it should be stated that total anthocyanins were determined using cyanidin-3-glucoside as a chemical standard.

Response 5: The corrections have been made to the text.

Point 6: The Discussion. In this section, the authors compare the obtained results with the data of other scientists in detail. However, the innovativeness of the conducted research was not justified in this section. Since the hypotheses were not formulated, the discussion is essentially narrative in nature.

Response 6: The corrections have been made to the text.

Point 7: The Conclusions are focused on the issues raised in the study. Again, the same narrative statement as in the abstract (compare p. 1, lines 22-24 and p. 10, lines 350-351) is completely pointless.

Response 7: The corrections have been made to the text.

Point 8: Note. The names of plants, when they are mentioned for the first time in the text, must be written with the author's name, for example Rosa canina L., R. gallica L. etc.

Response 8: The corrections have been made to the text.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no more concerns.