Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled "Abscission of orange fruit (Citrus sinensis (L.) Osb.) in the Mediterranean Basin depends more on environmental conditions than on fruit ripeness" by Khefifi et al. was reviewed for publication in Agronomy. The manuscript describes the results from a multi-year study on fruit abscission of oranges grown in three different sites, and provides valuable insight into the influence of the environment on the orange fruit abscission process.  

General Comments and Corrections.

In general, the manuscript is well written, with some minor English grammar corrections attend to (I made some suggestions). Minor English editing is recommended.

The font sizes and styles appear to be different in some sections (e.g. Page 3, lines 129-138)

Abstract, line 17, I think you mean determinants, not detriments. Please correct or clarify.

Page 2, line 66, “in three different areas” is written twice.

Page 2, line 75, reduced by, not of.

Page 2, line 79, led us to stop, not leaded us.

Page 9, lines 293-294. In Bleecker and Kende 2000, there is no mention of temperature shifts that induce ethylene production. Please check this citation, and provide correct reference if needed.

Figures and Tables

Table 1 is referred to only once in the text, while Supp. Table 1 is referred to five times. Which Table is more important for the results?

Figure 2, indicate in figure legend the meaning of the letters (a, b, c). The label for the x-axis is missing.

Figure 5, indicate in figure legend the meaning of the letters (a, b, c).

Supplementary Materials, Fig1 and 2, the labels for the x-axes are missing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript deals with a relevant subject to Agronomy, related with the abscission of orange fruit.However, there are a number of areas in the ms which require improvement and clarification. The ms has a very small number of biological variables and the materials and methods section needs valuable information. In addition, some parts of the discussion section should be rewritten.

Specific points:

Lines 64-66: authors should correct the sentence.

Why the higher FDF in Spain at the beginning of fruit maturation?

Figure 4: values of color index during maturation in Tunisia are not visible.

The discussion should be more in-depth, particularly in the section 3.1.

Authors should provide more information about the experiments: site in Corsica (line 322) ; orchard characterization (age, plant density, crop yield...), soil chemical analysis, irrigation…

Line 339: fruits instead of fruit.

How do the authors guarantee that tree water status not changed (lines 253-54)?

Lines 266-270: authors should change this part. Any possible effect of UV-B radiation on ethylene biosynthesis? And the role of additional hormones other than ethylene?

Lines 297-298: This sentence is quite interesting... meaning that soil analysis and plant mineral status are needed in this study.

Lines 310-311:...meaning that would be useful to quantify these hormones and carbohydrates.

Lines 390-392: Maybe true or a speculative hypothesis... these aspects should be studied.

How some increases in fruit detachment force during fruit maturation are explained (Supp. Fig. 1)? Readers want to know.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I have read the new version of the manuscript and the authors thoughts on all my previous remarks.

I believe that the manuscript can be accepted for publication.