Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Chen et al. presents research paper called: “Comparison of stomatal structure and distribution between ovules and leaves in Ginkgo biloba”. The manuscript is well composed and fits thematically to the scope of Forests. Text is easy to read. The photos of stomata on ovules and leaves are of great quality. My main concern is why the authors did not measure the stomatal characteristics? I demand from the authors to include numerical values of stomatal density and guard cell length per specific organ at least in tabular form. This is a lost opportunity if authors would present only the photos without measurements and analysis. I also suggest to authors to expand their discussion on acclimation potential of stomata to environmental conditions as explained in Petrik et al. 2020 (https://doi.org/10.3390/f11121359) and Petrik et al. 2022 (https://doi.org/10.1111/plb.13401). I suggest major revision of the manuscript due to the missing measurements of stomatal morphological traits.

Minor comment:

You have 42 publications in your references, but only 41 citations in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Chen et al. addressed all my comments and improved the quality of the presented manuscript. My main concern was that the values of stomatal density and size were not presented in the manuscript. Now, as Chen et al. included the average values with standard errors and post-hoc tests, I have no further major problem with acceptance of the manuscript. Authors also expanded materials and methods, discussion and conclusion which enhances the quality of the paper.

I suggest the acceptance of the paper in current form for publication in Forests.