Multidimensional Analysis of Diversity in DH Lines and Hybrids of Winter Oilseed Rape (Brassica napus L.)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an interesting study about variability estimation of DH lines and two hybrids generations of winter oilseed rape.
The subject is topical, given that the limited genetic variability is a major problem in rapeseed breeding. However, before consideration, authors need to address the below comments:
L 89. Please specify what these standard agricultural practices are. Agricultural practices and soil properties have a major influence on plant growth, development and variability, so in my opinion you need to complete these aspects. In this context, please provide complete details about the soil properties: texture, structure, etc. along with the agricultural practices used.
Author Response
Reviewer 1
Thank you very much for your review.
Line 89:
We agree that agricultural practices and soil properties have great influence on plants. The information about the type and structure of the soil, the crops that were cultivated previously, weather conditions and sowing density, as well as about agrotechnical procedures had been supplemented.
Reviewer 2 Report
The present paper describes the results of studying a set of DH lines according to the usual traits for the oilseed crop and important approaches to heterosis effects predictions. The paper provides an extensive multidimensional statistical analysis based on several modern statistical methods that is the strenght side of manuscript. This approach is used for assessing studied populations for the greatest genetic diversity for many traits simultaneously. As a result, data on significant phenotypic variability of B. napus lines were obtained. Results are interesting and informative but that the work demands a genetic analysis andseaching of correlations with phenotypic data.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
Thank you very much for your review.
Results are interesting and informative but that the work demands a genetic analysis and searching of correlations with phenotypic data.
This is a very valuable comment. As we mentioned in the last sentence in the introduction, the studied plant material is currently undergoing genetic analysis with the use of SSR markers. After collecting all the data and processing them, the aforementioned correlation analysis will be performed, as well as the search for the relationship between the observed phenotypic and genetic variability. The purpose of this research was to make sure that the possessed material shows an appropriate degree of variability, and that it is a good basis for the genetic research mentioned above. This will certainly be the topic of a future article.
Reviewer 3 Report
The variability estimation of DH lines and two generations of winter oilseed rape hybrids was studied. Although this is not an innovative study, the research design is appropriate and the results are clearly presented.
Certain specific comments are addressed below:
Line 35: Please insert scientific name in brackets.
Line 67: Authors should explain the meaning of HD.
Section 2.2: Why authors did no studied the seed yield per plant?
Section 2.3, lines 104 and 105: A further assumption of the one-way MANOVA is that there should be homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices. Did authors test the data for similar variances and covariances?
Line 150: Scientific name should be in italic in figure caption
Line 153: idem
Line 158: TSW, this acronym should appear in brackets in section 2.2 (line 93)
Incomprehensibly, the authors did not study the seed yield per plant, this would have improved the results and conclusions.
Author Response
Reviewer 3
Thank you very much for your revision.
The following corrections were made as recommended:
Line 35: “Brassica napus L.”, the scientific name of rapeseed was insert in brackets.
Line 67: We explained the meaning of DH shortcut as a “doubled haploid” lines. This explanation was also added in “Abstract” section, because there is the first time when DH shortcut appeared in the manuscript.
Section 2.2: The lack of seed per plant evaluation is explained at the end of this response.
Section 2.3, lines 104 and 105: Multivariate normality and homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices were tested by Box’s M test. The manuscript has also been supplemented with this explanatory sentence.
Line 150 and 153: Scientific names (Brassica napus) in figures captions were changed to italics.
Line 158: The TSW acronym has been changed to “thousand seed weight” because full traits names are used throughout the article. Similarly, this acronym was changed to the full name of the trait in the “Discussion” section.
We agree that a yield analysis would make our results even more accurate. Unfortunately, we encountered technical difficulties in conducting the field experiment. From the beginning it was planned that the seed yield per plot would be assessed. Unfortunately just before harvesting, it has been decided, that due to the size and proximity of the plots, their mechanical harvesting is impossible. Then, of course, it was too late to put isolators on the plants to be able to evaluate the seed yield per plant, and without this the seeds would fall off. Nevertheless, we decided that the obtained results, concerning the crucial yield-related traits, are also valuable without the yield itself.
