Assessment of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) Landraces for Their Agronomic, Biochemical Characteristics and Resistance to Phytophthora infestans

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The research carried out the morphological, agronomic, and physicochemical characterization and resistance to late blight of 35 tomato landraces from seven countries. After careful reading of the manuscript, I found it suitable for publication, since the authors used suitable and standard methods and analysis. Also, discussion is rich, since many important scientific references have been taken into consideration. I suggest to publish the manuscript after major revision, since I suggest to improve the manuscript as follows:

Abstract

It is suggested that a scientific and instructive conclusion be added to this section.

1.       Introduction

lines 73-90, Recast as in text.

2.       Results

Yield is the most important in vegetable production, but only information about tomato fruit quality is available. Can you add some information about tomato yield?

3.       Discussion

3.1 Characteristics of tomato landraces

The discussion is long and should be recast.

4.       Materials and Methods

4.2. Morphological, agronomic characterization and assessment of resistance to P. infestans of the local tomato varieties

References should be inserted in this section.

Reference

The format of references should be revised.

Please refer to the authors guidelines for style and presentation rule for the journal. Pay particular attention to section heading, reference list and table/figure guidelines.

Author Response

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is not suitable for publication. The research topic is often studied. The characterization of germplasm is very important. However, when performed randomly, it is just a characterization. Different when creating genetic variability and then evaluating dissimilarity. Could have performed multivariate analysis technique to verify genetic variability. The correct scientific name would be Solanum lycopersicum. The title proposes results on tomato germplasm with different nutritional levels and resistance to Phytophthora infestans. Therefore, a presentation of the importance of research within this context is expected in the introduction. In the introduction, emphasis was given only to carotenoids. The reason for studying Phytophthora infestans was not mentioned in the introduction. The existence of standard witnesses is not evident in the material and methods. What is the check for each carotenoid? what is the check for resistance to Phytophthora infestans? What was the experimental design? The carotenoid content is highly influenced by the environment. The environmental condition of the experiment was not explained in the text, making it difficult to interpret the results. As these are polygenic traits, the environment greatly influences the results.

Author Response

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

My comments are reported in the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This study describes the results of fruit characterization of local tomato varieties.

However, in this manuscript, it is not a characteristic of local varieties, but rather a manuscript explaining the difference in phytochemical content due to the difference in the size and color of tomato fruit.

In the end, although this manuscript describes the characteristics of local varieties, there is no description of the local growing environment conditions.

Therefore, in the introduction part, the environmental characteristics of the area where the varieties of each area were collected should be described.

In addition, the environmental characteristics in which Phytophtoora infestans thrive should be described in the introduction section. And in the discussion section, authors should discuss the relationship between the growing environment of tomatoes and changes in tomato fruit quality and disease.

Differences in cultivation methods such as soil cultivation, hydroponic cultivation, open field cultivation, and greenhouse cultivation have a great effect on the change in the fruit characteristics of tomatoes. It is questionable how much the reproducibility of the experiment will be if it is simply explained as this manuscript without such explanation.

In the table in the manuscript, classification was made according to size rather than classification according to the characteristics of local varieties. If so, there are other differences in the size of tomato fruit rather than local characteristics. Then it is questionable whether it is necessary to discuss local characteristics.

And please refer to the attachments for matters not covered here.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript. Attached we send the responses to the comments and suggestions received Responses to comments and suggestions received in the reviewer's report can be found below

Comment 1:

This study describes the results of fruit characterization of local tomato varieties.

However, in this manuscript, it is not a characteristic of local varieties, but rather a manuscript explaining the difference in phytochemical content due to the difference in the size and color of tomato fruit

Replay 1:

Although these elements are emphasized in the statistical calculations, the results of the paper are useful for breeders, the pharmaceutical industry and farmers.

Comment 2:

In the end, although this manuscript describes the characteristics of local varieties, there is no description of the local growing environment conditions.

Therefore, in the introduction part, the environmental characteristics of the area where the varieties of each area were collected should be described.

In addition, the environmental characteristics in which Phytophtoora infestans thrive should be described in the introduction section. And in the discussion section, authors should discuss the relationship between the growing environment of tomatoes and changes in tomato fruit quality and disease.

Differences in cultivation methods such as soil cultivation, hydroponic cultivation, open field cultivation, and greenhouse cultivation have a great effect on the change in the fruit characteristics of tomatoes. It is questionable how much the reproducibility of the experiment will be if it is simply explained as this manuscript without such explanation.

In the table in the manuscript, classification was made according to size rather than classification according to the characteristics of local varieties. If so, there are other differences in the size of tomato fruit rather than local characteristics. Then it is questionable whether it is necessary to discuss local characteristics.

Replay 2:

We agree with the reviewer's observations.

We note that similar suggestions were made by another reviewer. That is why I have inserted the following texts to answer all the comments in this category.

1. Therefore, we will rename subchapter 4.1 "Biological material and experimental conditions". We will also introduce the following text in this subchapter (after R 527):

“Cluj-Napoca is located in the northwestern part of Romania, in the Transylvanian Hilly Depression. Cluj's climate is temperate-continental. The average annual temperature is 8.2oC, and the amount of annual precipitation is 557 mm. The experimental field was located on a preluvosol land with a high clay content.

The experimental tomato crops were organized in the open field, between May and September. In the experimental years 2019 and 2020, the temperatures during the vegetation period exceeded the multiannual average, and the precipitation recorded lower values compared to the multiannual values. However, massive late blight infections were achieved in both years due to the rainy periods in July-August, which lasted between 4 and 6 days.”

2. I introduced the following text to the discussions (after R 393).

“Tomato fruit quality and susceptibility to various diseases are influenced by a number of factors. This species will produce high quality fruit under conditions of abundant irradiation and mild temperature ranges. Low temperature and low light cause swelling and spot ripening (Rylski et al, 1994; Rana et al, 2014). K and Ca deficiencies produce blotchy ripening and blossom-end put. The accessibility of the two elements in the plant depends on water absorption which in turn is influenced by light intensity, temperature, humidity and salinity (Adams and Ho, 1995, Sima and al, 2010). Temperatures below 12℃ and above 32℃ inhibit lycopene synthesis (Yvon et al 2003).

Tomato late blight attack can compromise the entire tomato crop, sensitive varieties, under high humidity conditions. Therefore, finding new tomato varieties with resistance to Phytophthora infestans remains essential to reduce damage and reduce the amount of fungicides (Hou et al, 2020; Leesutthiphonchai et al, 2018).”

3. We mentioned in R 73-75 the importance of landraces for organic crops, because a great genetic diversity can provide us with sources of resistance to the attack of plant parasites. We detailed the aspects related to late blight in the context of the presentation of the results from subchapter 2.1 (R 156-163). Therefore, we will move this paragraph (R 156-163) to the Introduction chapter, after R 80.

Comment 3:

And please refer to the attachments for matters not covered here.

Replay 3:

Of course, we will respond point by point to all comments and suggestions in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Author Response

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors made improvements to the manuscript. The manuscript remains simple for a scientific publication.

Author Response

Reviewer 4 Report

To some extent, the manuscript has been corrected.

However, please refer to the following information and correct it.

It is recommended to modify Table 1 to supplementary Table S1, and to modify Table 2 to Table 1 in this manuscript.

And at the ending point of the discussion, write a conclusion of about 5 lines.

Author Response