In Vitro Screening for Salinity Tolerance in Garden Pea (Pisum sativum L.)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1- the research is very interesting especially to pea growers and researchers,...however the English is not smooth and need to be refined all over the manuscript.

 

2- Figure 1: it is not clear at all as it stand now, authors should separate the figure into  1A, 1B, IC, and I D corresponding each salt conc. to clarify the variations between the 22 pea accession that used in this study.

3- Figure 3: again authors should separate the root length from the shoot length also as of 3A, 3B, 3C, and 3D corresponding each salt conc. 

4- Figure 4: this figure is not clear at all and the variation between the pea cultivars, so separate the plant fresh weight into 4A, 4B, 4C and 4D Based on the salt concentrations that used in this study.

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time and efforts. Your comments were very helpful in revising and improving our manuscript. We agree with all comments and recommendations and corrected the manuscript according them.

Comment 1- The research is very interesting especially to pea growers and researchers,...however the English is not smooth and need to be refined all over the manuscript.

Response: As suggested, English language of the manuscript was revised. All revisions are marked by track changes.

Comment 2- Figure 1: it is not clear at all as it stand now, authors should separate the figure into 1A, 1B, IC, and I D corresponding each salt conc. to clarify the variations between the 22 pea accession that used in this study.

Response: The Figure 1 was separated in four graphs according to the salt concentration. Please see Figure 1 in the manuscript.

Comment 3- Figure 3: again authors should separate the root length from the shoot length also as of 3A, 3B, 3C, and 3D corresponding each salt conc.

Response: The Figure 3 was separated in eight graphs according to the salt concentration and the trait. Please see Figure 3 and Figure 4 in the manuscript.

Comment 4- Figure 4: this figure is not clear at all and the variation between the pea cultivars, so separate the plant fresh weight into 4A, 4B, 4C and 4D Based on the salt concentrations that used in this study.

Response: The Figure 4 was separated in four graphs according to the salt concentration. Please see Figure 5 in the manuscript.

We do hope that the new versions of the figures are now clear enough and meet your suggestions.

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall comments:

The MS entitled “In vitro screening for salinity tolerance in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.)” seems to be well designed and written. In my opinion the MS should be accepted for publication after addressing few major issues.

Specific comments:

(1)Authors showed only the root and shoot length data, however, root or shoot fresh or dry weight is more important as compared to length. Authors should add the fresh or dry weight data of the said parameters and revised the results and discussion section.

(2)The resolution of figure 1 is poor. Authors should improve the figure 1 quality.

(3) In figure 3, standard error bar should be plotted against each bar graph.

Author Response

Dear Review 2,

Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions. We highly appreciate your time and efforts. All of your comments are taken into consideration in the revised version of our manuscript.

Comment 1. The MS entitled “In vitro screening for salinity tolerance in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.)” seems to be well designed and written. In my opinion the MS should be accepted for publication after addressing few major issues.

Response: Thank you very much. We agree with all comments and recommendations and corrected the manuscript according them.

Specific comments:

Comment (1) Authors showed only the root and shoot length data, however, root or shoot fresh or dry weight is more important as compared to length. Authors should add the fresh or dry weight data of the said parameters and revised the results and discussion section.

Response: The data about plant fresh weight are now presented in Figure 5.

Comment (2) The resolution of figure 1 is poor. Authors should improve the figure 1 quality.

Response: Thank you for bringing this to our attention we improved the quality of Figure 1.

Comment (3): In figure 3, standard error bar should be plotted against each bar graph.

Response: We modified the Figure 3. Please see figures 3 and 4 in the new version of the manuscript.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors revised the MS according to my comments. In my opinion, the MS should be accepted for publication.