Transcriptomic Analysis Reveals the Mechanism of Picea crassifolia Survival for Alpine Treeline Condition

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is now acceptable for publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have provided the satisfactory replies to the queries raised and hence the manuscript can be accepted for publication in the Forests in present form.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article entitled "Transcriptomic analysis reveals the mechanism of Picea crassifolia survival to alpine treeline condition" by Shi et al. reported the concentrations of non-structural carbohydrates along with nitrogen in current year needles, branches as well as roots within the elevation range of 2500-3300 meters. Then they carried the RNA-seq analysis for determination of differentially expressed genes at various elevations in Picea plants. The authors concluded, based on their observations, pathways that are being affected because of elevation and are helpful in survival to the alpine treeline. 
The article is well-written and nicely presented but it can not be accepted in the present format. The authors require to address the following concerns：

The RNA-seq data requires to be validated by other technique (such as RT-qPCR or Western blot) before it can be published in article. The authors should carry validation of RNA-seq data and incorporate in the results section before considering for publication.

Authors have used the word 'significant' lot of times in describing results in sections 3.1 although the changes are seem to be not a lot. The authors need to address the issue.  The authors should add alphabets A-F or what deemed suitable to each graph in figures 1-3 to better understand the results presented. They should include information about the top and bottom panels in figures 1-3. The authors should revisit the other figures (in supplementary data) to change accordingly.

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

The manuscript（MS）,“ Transcriptomic analysis reveals the mechanism of

Picea crassifolia survival to alpine treeline condition”，reports academically useful information and is thus worthy for publication. The MS preparation is generally good. Only minor reversions are requested as the following.

 

Line 15  Physiological  ?  - Something missing after the term?

L.36        Details or references are needed about the analytic method for soluble sugars and starch.

93 Place letters (A, B, C, D , etc.) relatively in Figs. 1, 2 and 3. 238 Delete “,” after biosynthesis 269 in – In 412 Delete one of ‘ national ‘(repeated) 420, L. 427, L.512 etc. Add “，” after authors’ last names.

Please check the MS carefully.  It will be helpful if the language check is done by a native English speaker.

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a well-presented manuscript deals with an interesting topic of the underlying mechanisms of treeline formation via a detailed transcriptomic analysis. But, some concerns need to be addressed to be fit as follows:

Abstract: More details of the estimated parameters should be described before the results. For instance, what is meant by physiological? The full term of GO and KEGC should be mentioned. Line 29: replace "surcuval" with "survival". Introduction: It is very concise and more information on the treeline formation all over the world should be added. Line 55: replace the "growth limitation hypothesis" with "GLH". Line 56: replace the "carbon limitation hypothesis "with "CLH". Material and methods: What is meant by "until it reached a constant weight". The references for the methods used for the estimation of soluble sugars and starch should be added. Results: transfer lines 219-224 to the discussion section.