Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

- Critically check the whole text as there are any typographical errors

-Please re-check the abbreviations which have been mentioned in the whole manuscript. Please elaborate them at least once at its first place in the abstract and other sections of manuscript.

- Add after the codes of your genotypes the word genotype in the whole text, don’t mention the code only.

- Lines 17-19, Rewrite the sentence

-Lines 40 -41, The sentence must be modified, as it is very hard to understand.

- Line 87, What do you mean about these numbers (AN 2.27-, 2.31-, and 2.82- times higher than Morita II).

-Lines 90 -92, check the grammar in this sentence.

-Lines 108-109, check the grammar in this sentence and capitalized "Figure". You mention it as Fig. and another with the whole word " Figure", please follow the journal rules.

- In Figure 1, Check the units of stomatal conductance and also add the abbreviation of Net photosynthesis and stomatal conductance in the caption.

- In Figure 1, Modify five genotype to genotypes in its caption.

- Line 111, Check the mentioned information which was not reported in the figure 1.

- In Figure 2, Check the units of stomatal conductance, mention the whole name of VPD as the other parameters and add the abbreviation of the others in the figure

- In Figure 3, change the regression symbol from r² to R² as you mentioned in its caption.

- In Figure 2 and 3, Change the captions to Regression ………

- In Figure 3, Modify five genotype to genotypes in its caption.

- Line 118, Add the standard deviation (SD) instead of sd.

- Line 120, Check numbers.

- Lines 143 and 153, Mention the full name of ( Fv/Fm, Fv : F0 ratio and F0 : Fm ratio) as it is the first mention.

- Line 149, Replace (plants) with (genotypes) after the codes.

- Line 160, Add the unit (11.8…….)

-  In Figure 5H, Add the significance letters as 5A, 5B and so on.

-  In Figure 8, Add the abbreviation of (DEPS) on both caption and chart.

-  In Figure 9, Add the abbreviation on both caption and chart.

-  In Figure 10, Revise the title of Y axis and add the significance letters on the chart.

- Line 312, Remove the word (plants).

- Lines 311- 314, Remove the repeated sentences (Means followed by  different letter denote statistical significance (p < 0.001). Means ± sd (n = 5). All value de-notes the mean (± SD) of 5 repetitions. In each parameter, values followed by different 314 letters are statistically significant at P ≤ 0.05).

- In Table 1, Which significance level did you use ( 0.05 or 0.001).

- Line 368, Replace the comma with a full stop.

- Line 447, Add the reference describing that non-stressed S. rebaudiana plants 447 showed 1.06 U CAT min^-1 mg^-1 protein.

-In Figure 11, You have two figures numbered with the same number, please rearrange the figures again.

- Line 455, Remove the comma after the reference

- Line 499, Mention the source and pedigree of your genotypes

- Line 502, Remove the letter "a"

- Line 534, Remove the excess "this".

-Line 547, 05 a.m. (in predawn) and midday (12:00 p.m.) modify this sentence to be in predawn (05 a.m.) and midday (12:00 p.m.)

-Lines 549, 556 and 564, Adjust the symbol °

- Line 612, Add the program used in drawing the heatmaps.

- Line 616, Remove the Figure 12 from the conclusion section

- Please re-write the conclusion. Put detail of any limitations of this study, describe implications of this study and provide recommendations for future perspectives.

- Figure 8 mentioned twice, please rearrange your figures

In Figure 8, Explain Why did you use SE instead of SD as in the rest of Figures?

-Line 784, Review the reference data.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

R.: The authors are grateful for the extensive MS analysis carried out by the reviewer and confirm that all points noted in the review have been corrected in red and a new proofreading has been performed with Mr. Jeffrey A. Bradley, Blue Springs, MO, USA, a native English speaker. Thanks for your improvement to this manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Manuscript " Physiological and Enzymatic Markers to Predict Elite Genotypes of Stevia rebaudiana L". In their study, use Five genotypes of S. rebaudiana which have gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence, chloroplast pigments, and xanthine pools to select the physiological and metabolic pathways associated with better steviol glycosides production. 

 

II have found  a lot of weaknesses in the manuscript

- In the Title, you have written marker and this is a big error, you used traits or characteristics. 

- How you knew that the genotypes used are elite?

- Where it is were predict in this study?

-  The close correlation between them may indicate collinearity, so an must be made an analysis.

- The regression analysis is counted between a dependent variable and an independent variable, but in your study was counted between dependents. 

Author Response

R.: The authors are grateful for the extensive MS analysis carried out by the reviewer and confirm that all points noted in their review have been corrected in red and a new proofreading has been performed by Mr. Jeffrey A. Bradley, Blue Springs, MO, USA, a native English speaker. Thanks for your assistance with the improvement to this manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

 

 

I would like to thank the authors for addressing my comments. Following the revision to the article, the authors have addressed the vast majority of my previous round of review and the manuscript is much improved. I feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

Must be modified these points in the manuscript:

 -  The close correlation between them may indicate collinearity, so an analysis must be made.

- The regression analysis is counted between a dependent variable and an independent variable, but in your study was counted between dependents.