Next Article in Journal
Dynamics of Soil Organic Carbon Mineralization Under Straw Addition: Evidence from a Controlled Incubation Experiment
Previous Article in Journal
Wheat Production Transition Towards Digital Agriculture Technologies: A Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
LSES1, Encoding a Member of the Casein Kinase 1 Family, Is Involved in the Regulation of Leaf Senescence in Rice
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Homogalacturonan Methylesterification and Cell Wall Regulation: Integrating Biochemistry, Mechanics, and Developmental Signaling for Crop Improvement

Agronomy 2025, 15(11), 2641; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112641
by Duoduo Wang 1,*, Isabel B. Ortega-Salazar 2 and Barbara Blanco-Ulate 2,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Agronomy 2025, 15(11), 2641; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15112641
Submission received: 25 October 2025 / Revised: 12 November 2025 / Accepted: 14 November 2025 / Published: 18 November 2025

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors
  1. The quantity and classification of PMEs/PMEIs in different plant species should be described in separate tables. It would be preferable to include a phylogenetic tree analyzing published PMEs/PMEIs to illustrate their evolutionary relationships.
  2. The regulatory relationships between transcription factors, hormones, and PMEs/PMEIs should also be summarized in separate tables.
  3. The figures are unclear, and the figure legends are too vague, failing to highlight the key points of the visual content.
  4. The text alternates between using "pectin methylesterification" and "HG methylesterification."
  5. It is recommended to consistently use "homogalacturonan (HG) methylesterification" throughout the text, unless specifically referring to other pectin components.
  6. The data presented in figures and tables are not sufficiently discussed.
  7. Table 1 lists the roles of HG methylesterification in various biological processes, but the main text lacks in-depth analysis of key cases from the table. Suggestion: Select multiple representative cases (such as cold stress and pathogen resistance) for thorough discussion in the main text.
  8. Some abbreviations are not provided with their full terms upon first use. In addition, in figure 1, PM denotes plasma membrane, not pectin methylesterification." Ensure that throughout the text, the abbreviation "PM" consistently refers to "pectin methylesterification." If there is any discussion of the plasma membrane in the text, it is essential to use the full term "plasma membrane" or the standard abbreviation "PM," clearly defined upon its first occurrence. However, it is preferable to avoid this conflict altogether by using the full term "plasma membrane" for all related discussions.
  9. The conclusion section lacks forward-looking perspectives. The original "Future Perspectives" part overemphasizes technical methods and fails to highlight breakthrough directions at the theoretical or application level.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In totol, this review masterfully covers the topic from multiple angles—biochemistry (PMEs/PMEIs), regulation (TFs, hormones, pH), mechanics (models, feedback loops), developmental biology (growth, morphogenesis, stress), and application (breeding).

 

Minor comments:

1. Sections 2.2 and 2.3 read like a dense catalogue of factors. While accurate and well-referenced, this "cooking list" style can make it difficult for the reader to extract the overarching principles. Accordingly, consider structuring these paragraphs thematically (group TFs by the developmental process they control (for 2.2), or group hormones by their general effect (for 2.3)).

2. The same topic (tip growth) is discussed two times (in section 3.2 and 4.2). Consider consolidating it to avoid repetition.

3. Consider adding some transition and/or introduction sentence for each paragraph, especially in section 2 and 4. In the current version paragraphs go directly into examples without first stating the main point. It is hard to read.

4. The quality of the figures may be enhanced by increasing font and objects size (especially for fig 2).

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have modified the manuscript. All comments have been taken into account in improving the quality of the manuscript, which meets the requirements of this journal and can be accepted before modifying the grammars mistakes. Additionally, the scientific names in the article, such as Arabidopsis and other Latin names, should be italicized. However, "maize" in Table 4 should not be italicized.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. We have carefully read through the manuscript and checked all abbreviations and scientific names to ensure proper italicization throughout. Minor grammatical errors have also been corrected.

Back to TopTop