Adaptive Strategies to Biotic Stress in Qatar’s Native Flora

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript provides an extensive overview of adaptive strategies of Qatar’s native plants to biotic stress, linking these mechanisms with abiotic pressures. The topic is highly relevant and the review is comprehensive. However, improvements are required in clarity, organization, and precision of arguments. Below are my detailed comments.

Comments

1. The abstract is informative but too long. It should be shortened while retaining key findings and main contributions.

2. The introduction lacks a clear statement of the research gap. Please emphasize why this review is needed now.

3. English language requires improvement. Some sentences are repetitive and wordy.

4. Figures (e.g., Figure 1 map) need better resolution and clearer legends.

5. Please reduce overlap between the introduction and section 2, as some background is repeated.

6. The classification of plant responses (avoidance, tolerance, escape) should be presented in a concise table for clarity.

7. Some subsections (e.g., 2.2 Chemical Defences) are too descriptive. Condense them and highlight novel insights.

8. Add a table summarizing key Qatari species, their traits, and specific biotic stress adaptations.

9. Section 2.3 on symbiosis is important, but the discussion is fragmented. Please synthesize better the role of AMF and PGPR.

10. Competition among plants (Section 2.4) could benefit from a schematic diagram to show water, nutrient, and light competition strategies.

11. References are abundant but some are outdated. Include more recent studies (2020–2024) on desert plant stress biology.

12. Some parts read like a textbook. Please make the narrative more analytical by comparing across species and mechanisms.

13. The discussion on chemical constituents (Section 3.2.4) is very long. Condense and focus on the most relevant metabolites.

14. The conclusion should emphasize practical applications, such as crop breeding, biotechnology, or desert restoration.

15. Please clarify if any of the mentioned metabolites (e.g., alkaloids, phenolics) have been functionally tested in Qatari species, or if evidence is extrapolated from related species.

16. The manuscript sometimes mixes abiotic and biotic stress without clear distinction. Please separate more clearly where the focus is on pathogens/herbivores vs drought/salinity.

17. Include a graphical abstract or concept figure summarizing the three main adaptive strategies (physical, chemical, symbiotic).

18. The contribution of endophytic microbes is interesting but needs stronger linkage with practical biocontrol potential.

19. Revise the reference formatting for consistency, as some citations lack complete details.

20. Overall structure is logical but very dense. Consider shortening by 15–20% for better readability.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

Many Thanks, please see the responses below.

Bassam T.Yasseen, Corresponding Author, 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review "Adaptive strategies to biotic stress in Qatar's native flora" analyzes and systematizes data on the morphological, physiological and biochemical adaptation mechanisms of Qatari plants to biotic and abiotic stresses. The authors reviewed an extensive list of literature, with nearly half of the sources they analyzed (65 out of 151) representing studies from the last five years. The work presented by the authors is undoubtedly relevant and will be of interest to a wide range of researchers. However, the authors should revise the manuscript to improve the presentation and reader comprehension.

The key recommendations I would like to highlight to the authors are:

1. The Abstract and Conclusions present overly general conclusions. For example, in the Abstract, lines 8-15, these conclusions are applicable to a general description of adaptive strategies in any plant in any habitat, not necessarily in native plants of Qatar. The conclusions should be more specific regarding the features of Qatari plants. Or, if Qatar's plants exhibit generally the same strategies as those characteristic of xerophyte and halophyte groups, state this fact more clearly and unambiguously.
2. Page 5 (paragraph 4, line 12) – a part of the text is repeated (approximately 3 paragraphs). This should be removed.
3. Section 2.1 “Physical Defenses”. Authors should provide examples of species from the native flora of Qatar that possess the indicated types of physical defenses: trichomes, waxy leaf coatings, cuticles, and others. Since this is an analysis of the mechanisms existing in the flora of Qatar, it is extremely important to provide not only general information about the defense mechanisms existing in plants but also to specifically identify them for the plant species present in Qatar.
4. Section 2.2 “Chemical Defenses” provides very general information that could be found in a plant physiology textbook; it does not provide examples of native plants of Qatar that produce substances that perform defensive functions. This information should be added to this section. I fully understand that the authors' goal in this section was to provide the reader with general information about the chemical defense substances in plants. However, the value of this review lies precisely in its focus on analyzing the adaptive strategies of the native flora of Qatar. Therefore, the authors should focus on examples from this particular group of plants. I would like to draw the authors' attention to the examples they provided in this section. Page 7, Section 2.2 (Paragraph 1, line 5) –chrysanthemum as an example is not very appropriate. Same section, paragraph 4. Phacelia is a genus of plants growing in North and South America. If there are species of this genus belonging to the native flora of Qatar, they should be listed in this example using their full names. If not, the example is inappropriate. I would like to draw the authors' attention to such examples, as they are inconsistent with the article's title and are misleading to the reader.
5. Section 2.4.3 “Adaptive strategies to compete for nutrients”. Could the authors add a little more information to the text? For example, after the sentence on line 6, indicate which specific plant species from the native flora of Qatar are associated with the AMFs described by the authors?
6. Section 3.1 “Qatari Native Plants Resist Herbivores” lacks references. Not a single reference is provided for six paragraphs on pages 11 and 12 (paragraphs 2-5, 7, and 8 in this section), although the authors provide numerous specific facts regarding the biology and biochemistry, as well as the practical and pharmaceutical value of several species. Such data should be supported by references to relevant literature.
7. Section 3.2.1 “The role of the cuticle”. Paragraph 1 – numerous facts are provided, but no references are provided.
8. Section 3.2.3 “ABA biosynthesis and its role as a stress hormone”. The sentence on lines 11-13: “Its accumulation in plant tissues, particularly in mesophyll and guard cells, presents both disadvantages and benefits”. I would recommend the authors avoid using the terms “disadvantages” and “benefits” in relation to the physiological responses of plants induced by ABA. What the authors call disadvantages, including limiting photosynthesis, respiration and transpiration, stomatal closure, and growth inhibition, ultimately contribute to what the authors call “benefits” – enhanced stress tolerance. In this context, it is better to maintain a neutral assessment of the physiological effects of ABA.
9. Page 19, paragraphs 1-3. The authors describe the anatomical and physiological features of native plants in Qatar, focusing primarily on the cuticle. Since section 3.2.4 is devoted to “chemical constituents of native Qatari plants”, these paragraphs should be moved to section 3.2.1.
10. Page 20, the last paragraph is devoted to ABA. It should be moved to section 3.2.3, since it describes physiological reactions common to all plants, not just native plants of Qatar.

Minor comments.

1. Full Latin names of species should be given the first time they are mentioned in the text; abbreviated versions are used thereafter. For example, Tetraena qatarensis is first mentioned in Section 1 Introduction (page 2, paragraph 5, line 3), then on page 5 (paragraph 1, line 4). In the second instance and thereafter, T. catarensis should be written. The all Latin names should be checked in this manner. All Latin names should be written in italics—in Table 2 and on page 19 (paragraph 2) they are presented in regular font. Furthermore, I recommend that authors, when first mentioning a Latin name of a species in the text, not neglect to specify the author who first described the species. For example, Tetraena qatarensis (Hadidi) Beier & Thulin and Limonium axillare (Forssk.) Kuntze.
2. Section 3.1. “Qatari Native Plants Resist herbivores” – “herbivores” should be capitalized.
3. Page 12, paragraph 1, lines 2-4. The sentence “Traditionally, it has been used medicinally for cancer, uterine stimulation, malaria, dropsy, and skin conditions, but incorrect dosage can cause central nervous system (CNS) depression and other toxic effects” should be corrected. It would be better to formulate this idea differently, for example: “...it has been used medicinally against cancer, malaria, dropsy, skin conditions, and for uterine stimulation…”.
4. Section 3.2.1 “The role of the cuticle”. Paragraph 2, sentence 1 – the example about wheat is inconsistent with the context of the article as a whole, as well as the information presented further in this section. If the authors want to point out to readers that even mesophytic plants experience cuticle thickening under saline conditions, they should develop this idea more broadly and clearly. This is especially important because the authors further contrast mesophytic plants with desert plants. This may cause a reader's confusion.
5. In the title of Table 1, the word “mesophytic” should be added after the word “non-stressed” for greater clarity.
6. Page 16 – two schemes for the same reaction will only confuse the reader. One should be left with explanations.
7. Section title 3.2.4: The chemical constituents of native plants. The word “Qatari” should be added.

These comments do not reduce the importance and scientific value of the review presented by the authors; they are aimed solely at improving the structure and quality of presentation of the material analyzed by the authors and facilitating the reader's understanding of the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

Please see our responses below, many thanks.

Bassam T. Yasseen, Corresponding author, 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors answered all my questions and took my comments into account. I have no more suggestions. The only issue is that the authors need to format the text according to the journal's guidelines. Pages 1, 5, 13, 17, 18.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2, 

I would like to thank you very much for your valuable comments. I really indebted to you that your comments let us improved the article very much. Please, let the Editorial Board know that, if the article needs language check, we are happy to cover the cost. 

Have a good day.

Bassam T. Yasseen, Corresponding Author,