Improving Crop Tolerance to Abiotic Stress for Sustainable Agriculture: Progress in Manipulating Ascorbic Acid Metabolism via Genome Editing

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Reviewer comments for sustainability-3372061

This paper reviews the advancements in ascorbic acid metabolism and its impact on stress tolerance in plants. Additionally, it summarizes the role of CRISPR/Cas technology in enhancing ascorbic acid metabolism and stress resilience. I have several concerns that I believe should be addressed to enhance the manuscript:

Here are some comments:

1.      Most of the content focuses on genes involved in ascorbic acid metabolism, with an attempt to link them to stress tolerance genes. I suggest a more focused title, such as "Advancements in ascorbic acid biosynthesis and their enhancement via genome editing"

2.      If the authors aim to review the challenges of climate change and sustainable agriculture, focusing solely on ascorbic acid and CRISPR/Cas may be insufficient. A broader discussion encompassing additional technologies and pathways is essential. For instance, incorporating studies on genetic vulnerability analysis in response to future climate change in crops like wheat (Zhao et al., 2023), Populus (Sang et al., 2022), and alfalfa (Zhang et al., 2024) would provide a more comprehensive perspective.

3.      There is a lack of figures summarizing the role of AsA and its contribution to abiotic stresses. As my understanding, AsA is only one intermediate step related to abiotic stress. Try to illustrate its importance in stress tolerance.

4.      The content of section 4.1 relates to the importance of transcription factors in environmental stress responses and AsA biosynthesis. I think summarizing the key transcription factors for various types of stress is sufficient. Connecting transcription factors with AsA content seems redundant because transcription factors affect various metabolic pathways.

 

5.      The name of the first part can be changed. "Introduction" seems to not contain enough information.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

This paper reviews the advancements in ascorbic acid metabolism and its impact on stress tolerance in plants. Additionally, it summarizes the role of CRISPR/Cas technology in enhancing ascorbic acid metabolism and stress resilience. I have several concerns that I believe should be addressed to enhance the manuscript:

Here are some comments:

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestions, which were greatly valued and contributed to improving of the manuscript.

 

1. Most of the content focuses on genes involved in ascorbic acid metabolism, with an attempt to link them to stress tolerance genes. I suggest a more focused title, such as "Advancements in ascorbic acid biosynthesis and their enhancement via genome editing"

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestion. We chose the current title, "Improving Crop Tolerance to Abiotic Stress for Sustainable Agriculture: Progress in Manipulating Ascorbic Acid Metabolism via Genome Editing", to emphasize the dual focus on improving abiotic stress tolerance and promoting sustainability. We believe it better reflects the work's broader goals and practical implications.

 

2. If the authors aim to review the challenges of climate change and sustainable agriculture, focusing solely on ascorbic acid and CRISPR/Cas may be insufficient. A broader discussion encompassing additional technologies and pathways is essential. For instance, incorporating studies on genetic vulnerability analysis in response to future climate change in crops like wheat (Zhao et al., 2023), Populus (Sang et al., 2022), and alfalfa (Zhang et al., 2024) would provide a more comprehensive perspective.

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestion. We agree that a broader discussion would provide a more comprehensive perspective on climate change and sustainable agriculture. However, the primary focus of this review is on ascorbic acid metabolism and its enhancement via genome editing, highlighting its potential role in reducing abiotic stress. We have incorporated, as suggested, references to the studies suggested in Section 8.

We hope this approach fulfils the right balance between addressing your comment and maintaining the focus of the review.

3. There is a lack of figures summarizing the role of AsA and its contribution to abiotic stresses. As my understanding, AsA is only one intermediate step related to abiotic stress. Try to illustrate its importance in stress tolerance.

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestion. Two new figures have been included. The first has as its subject stresses that lead to excessive production of reactive oxygen species (ROS). The second is a schematic representation of the response of plant cells to abiotic stresses, highlighting the role of L-Ascorbic acid and the enzymes of the ascorbate recycling system in the response of plant cells to environmental changes is an integral part of a much more complex system that leads the plant to tolerance to abiotic stresses.

4. The content of section 4.1 relates to the importance of transcription factors in environmental stress responses and AsA biosynthesis. I think summarizing the key transcription factors for various types of stress is sufficient. Connecting transcription factors with AsA content seems redundant because transcription factors affect various metabolic pathways.

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestion. We agree that transcription factors play a broad role in regulating various metabolic pathways, including stress responses. However, we believe their specific role in regulating ascorbic acid (AsA) biosynthesis deserves detailed discussion due to the ongoing efforts to unravel this complex regulatory network. For this reason, we have provided a comprehensive summary of the current literature in Section 4.1. Given its relevance and complexity, this detailed overview aims to support readers interested in this topic.

5. The name of the first part can be changed. "Introduction" seems to not contain enough information.

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestion. We agree that the title Introduction is inappropriate and has been modified accordingly.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic of the review is topical. The focus is on ascorbic acid as an antioxidant and signaling regulator in cells of higher plants. The authors carefully analyzed 182 scientific papers on major crops.  It is very valuable that more than 40% of the cited literature is from the last 5 years. 

The issues of metabolic pathways, modern directions of genome editing are discussed. The review provides valuable scientific information and is easy to understand.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

corresponds to

Author Response

Reviewer 2

The topic of the review is topical. The focus is on ascorbic acid as an antioxidant and signaling regulator in cells of higher plants. The authors carefully analyzed 182 scientific papers on major crops. It is very valuable that more than 40% of the cited literature is from the last 5 years.

The issues of metabolic pathways, modern directions of genome editing are discussed. The review provides valuable scientific information and is easy to understand.

RESPONSE: The authors express their gratitude to the Reviewer for the positive feedback on the manuscript. English has been improved to express the research more clearly.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper addresses a current topic associated with the consequences of climate change on plant physiology and crop production. Various type of abiotic stress were clearly discussed with emphasis on the rôle of ascorbic acid in the ability of plants tolerance of stress.  The authors preent a strategy for improving plant stress tolerance based on CRISPR technologies. the latter would represent a prospect for improving the metabolic pathway of ascorbic acid bioynthesis in plants in order to produce plants more resilient to abiotic stress.

Overall the article is well structured, easy to read and unterstand. it provides a synthesis of previous work carried out in the field 

Author Response

Reviewer 3

The paper addresses a current topic associated with the consequences of climate change on plant physiology and crop production. Various type of abiotic stress were clearly discussed with   ascorbic acid in the ability of plants tolerance of stress. The authors preent a strategy for improving plant stress tolerance based on CRISPR technologies. the latter would represent a prospect for improving the metabolic pathway of ascorbic acid bioynthesis in plants in order to produce plants more resilient to abiotic stress.

Overall the article is well structured, easy to read and unterstand. it provides a synthesis of previous work carried out in the field.

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for positive comments on the manuscript.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comment; This is very interesting review article to collect and discuss the Improving Crop Tolerance to Abiotic Stress for Sustainable Agriculture by Manipulating Ascorbic Acid Metabolism via Genome Editing

1.       The author should reduce the similarity (Percent match: 41%).

2.       Are any works done to show the resistance of plants to insect attack or fungi in response to L-Ascorbic acid biosynthesis?

3.       In the conclusions section; transfer it to the main text as it is not acceptable to insert citations in this section.

Then you can write a new conclusion without any citations.

4.       Where are the recommendations and overall limitations of the collected literature?

Author Response

Reviewer 4

This is very interesting review article to collect and discuss the Improving Crop Tolerance to Abiotic Stress for Sustainable Agriculture by Manipulating Ascorbic Acid Metabolism via Genome Editing

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for encouraging comments on the manuscript.

 

1. The author should reduce the similarity (Percent match: 41%).

RESPONSE: We regret this serious inconvenience. In accordance with the Reviewer's suggestion, we have taken action to drastically reduce the similarities.

 

2. Are any works done to show the resistance of plants to insect attack or fungi in response to L-Ascorbic acid biosynthesis?

RESPONSE: Although this was a Review on abiotic stresses that was written for the special issue "Adaptive Response and Mechanism of Crops to Abiotic Stresses—2nd Edition", we added a paragraph on the relationship between L-Ascorbic acid and attacks by insects and fungi, Section 6.

 

3. In the conclusions section; transfer it to the main text as it is not acceptable to insert citations in this section.

RESPONSE: As suggested, the paragraph has been transferred with a new title.

 

Then you can write a new conclusion without any citations.

RESPONSE: As suggested, a new conclusion was written.

 

4. Where are the recommendations and overall limitations of the collected literature?

RESPONSE: The authors thank the Reviewer for the suggestion. Section 8 now includes a section addressing the recommendations and limitations. This section summarizes key challenges, particularly regarding the CRISPR approach.

 

There are two new figures and two new paragraphs in the revised manuscript. Major changes are highlighted in light blue.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed all my questions. I agree to the publication of this paper.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Good work, I suggest accepting the review article.