An Exploration of Candidate Korean Native Poaceae Plants for Breeding New Varieties as Garden Materials in the New Climate Regime Based on Existing Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My major concern related to this manuscript:

Actually, however the topic of this study in very interesting. But, it seems that this research still dose not have any new novelty. Since, this information that has been presented in this research already was done by other researcher and now you presented all of them in this manuscript, which are valuable. But its not enough for this new manuscript. The best way would be evaluation of these selected plants or species for different ago-morphological traits in the Korea and then compared them to select the best ones in your area.   On the other hand, your idea or topic of this study is very nice and your materials or selected germplas are also good. But, your method for reaching to this goal is not sufficient and appropriate. Hence, in this case there are a lot of gaps in your study and your method can not reach you to your goals of this study.  

My other comments are as follow: 

Line 18: in the family of Poaceae including of ....

Line 21-23: However, this sentence is nearly good. But, it is not enough informative. Hence, it needs to extent the sentence and mention more results or details for the audience. In this case, your audience should receive the information in a short but formative sentence. on the other hand, you should mention why these selected new germplasm were or are better than the previous ones. 

Line 46:in the family of Poaceae. Please correct this error throughout your manuscript.

Line 65-69: Please in this part more clarify the gap of study and also your goals one by one. These two point (gaps and goals) should be very very clear for the audience.  

Material and method section: Generally, there is not any information or details regarding your materials and methods. 

Line 171-173: As, it was already mentioned your idea or topic of this study is very nice and your materials or selected germplas are also good. But, your method for reaching to this goal is not sufficient and appropriate. Hence, in this case there are a lot of gaps in your study and your method can not reach you to your goals of this study. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments 1: [Paste the full reviewer comment here.] Actually, however the topic of this study in very interesting. But, it seems that this research still dose not have any new novelty. Since, this information that has been presented in this research already was done by other researcher and now you presented all of them in this manuscript, which are valuable. But its not enough for this new manuscript. The best way would be evaluation of these selected plants or species for different ago-morphological traits in the Korea and then compared them to select the best ones in your area.   On the other hand, your idea or topic of this study is very nice and your materials or selected germplas are also good. But, your method for reaching to this goal is not sufficient and appropriate. Hence, in this case there are a lot of gaps in your study and your method can not reach you to your goals of this study. 
Response 1: [Type your response here and mark your revisions in red] Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have modified the manuscripts to state clearly that it is based on existing data. 
Please refer Line 13-18, Line 23-27, Line 68-77, Line 86-96, and Line 188-199. 

Comments 2: [Paste the full comment here.] Line 18: in the family of Poaceae including of ....
Line 46:in the family of Poaceae. Please correct this error throughout your manuscript.
Response 2: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to correct this error and all expression have been changed from “the family Poaceae” to “the Poaceae family”.

Comments 3: [Paste the full comment here.] Line 21-23: However, this sentence is nearly good. But, it is not enough informative. Hence, it needs to extent the sentence and mention more results or details for the audience. In this case, your audience should receive the information in a short but formative sentence. on the other hand, you should mention why these selected new germplasm were or are better than the previous ones. 
Response 3: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to emphasize this point. Please refer Line 23-27 in the revised manuscript.

Comments 4: [Paste the full comment here.] Line 65-69: Please in this part more clarify the gap of study and also your goals one by one. These two point (gaps and goals) should be very very clear for the audience.
Response 4: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to emphasize this point. Please refer Line 68-77 in the revised manuscript. 

Comments 5: [Paste the full comment here.] Material and method section: Generally, there is not any information or details regarding your materials and methods.
Response 5: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to emphasize this point. Please refer Line 86-96 and 102-106 in the revised manuscript.

Comments 6: [Paste the full comment here.] Line 171-173: As, it was already mentioned your idea or topic of this study is very nice and your materials or selected germplas are also good. But, your method for reaching to this goal is not sufficient and appropriate. Hence, in this case there are a lot of gaps in your study and your method can not reach you to your goals of this study. 
Response 6: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to emphasize this point. Please refer Line 186-199 in the revised manuscript.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. • Provide a clearer connection between the traits of the selected plants and their ability to withstand climate change. How do their genome sizes or life cycles make them better candidates for climate-resilient gardens?
   • Could you consider performing additional experiments to validate your findings, such as controlled tests on the plants' responses to climate stressors like drought or heat?

By addressing these comments and refining the manuscript, you can significantly improve your study's clarity, rigor, and impact. For the detailed comments, find the review report attached below.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Abstract

1st Sentence: “There are increasing needs for models of public garden with low-maintenance, and environmental stress to plant due to climate change is growing.”

• Issues:
• The phrase “needs for models of public garden” is awkward and unclear. It should be rephrased to “increasing demand for low-maintenance public garden models” for better flow and understanding.
• The phrase “environmental stress to plant” should be corrected to “environmental stress on plants.”
• Suggested Revision: “There is an increasing demand for low-maintenance public garden models, and environmental stress on plants due to climate change is growing.”

2nd Sentence: “Therefore, the demand for developing new plant varieties based on native plants as garden materials against climate change has increased fairly.”

• Issues:
• The phrase “increased fairly” is awkward and vague. It could be replaced with “significantly increased” or “increased substantially” for clarity.
• Suggested Revision: “As a result, the demand for developing new plant varieties based on native species for garden use in response to climate change has increased significantly.”

3rd Sentence: “Many plants in the family Poaceae are applied for various purposes such as food crops, fodder grasses, ornamental plants, or medical plants.”

• Issues:
• The phrase “are applied for various purposes” is not idiomatic. It would be more natural to say “are used for various purposes.”
• The term “medical plants” should be corrected to “medicinal plants.”
• Suggested Revision: “Many plants in the Poaceae family are used for various purposes, including food crops, fodder grasses, ornamental plants, and medicinal plants.”

4th Sentence: “Also, native plants have some economic and ecological benefits, and the utilization of native plants is positive in a garden.”

• Issues:
• The phrase “is positive in a garden” is vague and lacks specificity. It should be more precise, such as “offers advantages in garden settings.”
• Suggested Revision: “Additionally, native plants provide economic and ecological benefits, making them advantageous for use in gardens.”

General Comments:

• The abstract suffers from awkward phrasing, particularly in the first few lines. Redundancy in word choices (e.g., “native plants” mentioned twice within a short space) also hampers the flow.

Introduction

1st Sentence: “Role of gardens is expanding for biodiversity conservation as rapid urban expansion, and there are increasing needs for models of public garden with low-maintenance [1,2].”

• Issues:
• The sentence is difficult to follow due to poor structure. It should mention urban expansion and its consequences clearly.
• The phrase “Role of gardens is expanding” should be revised to “The role of gardens is expanding.”
• There is a lack of clarity on the connection between urban expansion and the need for low-maintenance gardens.
• Suggested Revision: “The role of gardens in biodiversity conservation is expanding due to rapid urban growth, which has increased the need for low-maintenance public garden models.”

3rd Sentence: “Many plants in the family Poaceae are applied as food crops, fodder grasses, ornamental plants, or medical plants [7].”

• Issues:
• The repetition from the abstract is unnecessary. The phrase “applied as” should be changed to “used as.”
• The term “medical plants” should be replaced with “medicinal plants.”
• Suggested Revision: “Many plants in the Poaceae family are used as food crops, fodder grasses, ornamental plants, or medicinal plants.”

4th Sentence: “Moreover, Dunster [9] insisted that Poaceae must be used for not solely for ornamental but multi-functions in the age of climate change.”

• Issues:
• The phrase “must be used for not solely for ornamental but multi-functions” is convoluted and grammatically incorrect.
• A clearer expression like “should be used not only for ornamental purposes but also for multiple functions”would improve readability.
• Suggested Revision: “Moreover, Dunster [9] argued that Poaceae should be used not only for ornamental purposes but also for a variety of functions in the age of climate change.”

5th Sentence: “However, some plant species in the family Poaceae are polyploid or have large and complicated genomes which make difficulties for breeding researches.”

• Issues:
• The phrase “make difficulties for breeding researches” is awkward and incorrect. It should be “pose challenges for breeding research.”
• Suggested Revision: “However, some Poaceae species are polyploid or have large and complex genomes, which pose challenges for breeding research.”

General Comments:

• The introduction contains awkward phrasings and unclear explanations that reduce its readability. There are several redundancies between the introduction and the abstract, which should be eliminated to avoid repetition.
• Transitions between ideas need to be smoother to improve the flow of the narrative.

Materials and Methods

1st Sentence: “The list of the Poaceae plant species was download from the KPNI (http://www.nature.go.kr/kpni/).”

• Issues:
• “Was download” is incorrect. It should be “was downloaded.”
• Suggested Revision: “The list of Poaceae plant species was downloaded from the KPNI (http://www.nature.go.kr/kpni/).”

3rd Sentence: “In the ‘Classification’ column, only ‘Species’ was selected while ‘Variety’, ‘Subspecies’, ‘Horticultural cultivar’, and ‘Cultivar’ were unchecked so that the list was filtered (Supplementary Table S1).”

• Issues:
• The phrase “so that the list was filtered” is passive and awkward. A clearer explanation would help.
• Suggested Revision: “In the 'Classification' column, only 'Species' was selected, while 'Variety,' 'Subspecies,' 'Horticultural cultivar,' and 'Cultivar' were deselected to filter the list (Supplementary Table S1).”

5th Sentence: “Finally, the Poaceae plants in which the reference genome was assembled were selected from the list of the Poaceae plants registered in the KPNI, and the characteristics including life cycle, and photosynthetic type were investigated (Table 1).”

• Issues:
• The sentence is long and unclear. The phrasing “in which the reference genome was assembled” is awkward. It would be clearer to say “for which a reference genome is available.”
• The use of “the characteristics including life cycle, and photosynthetic type were investigated” is vague. It should be more specific.
• Suggested Revision: “Poaceae plants with available reference genomes were selected from the KPNI list, and their characteristics, including life cycle and photosynthetic type, were analyzed (Table 1).”

General Comments:

• The materials and methods section suffers from long, convoluted sentences. Breaking down these sentences and improving clarity would make it more readable.
• The use of passive voice throughout this section detracts from its readability. Where possible, the section would benefit from active voice and more concise wording.

Results

1st Sentence: “Of the 494 Poaceae plants registered in the KPNI, the 352 plants were registered as species (Supplementary Table S1), and finally the 38 plants of them were analyzed in this study (Table 1).”

• Issues:
• The phrase “finally the 38 plants of them were analyzed” is awkward and should be rephrased.
• Redundancy in the use of “plants registered” twice in the sentence.
• Suggested Revision: “Out of the 494 Poaceae plants listed in the KPNI, 352 were registered as species (Supplementary Table S1), and 38 of these species were selected for analysis in this study (Table 1).”

3rd Sentence: “The plants, whose genome sizes were less than the genome size of rice (O. sativa), were selected, and a total of 5 plants were selected.”

• Issues:
• The sentence is repetitive (“were selected” appears twice in a short span).
• “The plants, whose genome sizes” is unnecessarily complicated. It can be simplified for readability.
• Suggested Revision: “Plants with genome sizes smaller than that of rice (O. sativa) were selected, resulting in five species chosen for analysis.”

General Comments:

• The results section also struggles with redundancy, awkward phrasing, and long sentences. It would benefit from clearer sentence structure and active voice.
• Some transitions between results are abrupt and could be smoothed with better linking phrases to improve flow.

 

 

Author Response

Comments 1: [Paste the full reviewer comment here.] Provide a clearer connection between the traits of the selected plants and their ability to withstand climate change. How do their genome sizes or life cycles make them better candidates for climate-resilient gardens?
Response 1: [Type your response here and mark your revisions in red] Thank you for pointing this out. Conducting experiments with actual plants requires significant time and money, and it is not feasible to include all plant species native to Korea. Therefore, it is crucial to select plant species for study using reasonable criteria before starting a full-scale experiment. Information obtained from model plants can be hypothesized for application to the target species of breeding, making it easier for the researchers to conduct studies on those plant species. model plants. Additionally, if the model plant itself can be used as a garden material, it would be eco-nomically beneficial because it could be developed into a variety, not just for research purposes, but also for practical use as a garden material. The main goals of this study are to establish criteria for selecting suitable candidate species for full-scale breeding research without incurring costs from expensive experiments, and to review their applicability. Small genome size provides some benefits in research. Research on model biology or genomics is the main focus of papers that address the topic of easier analysis when the genome size is smaller. Because of their reduced complexity, small genome sizes are crucial in data processing and genetic information interpretation, they increase analysis speed and accuracy. (The Arabidopsis Genome Initiative. Analysis of the genome sequence of the flowering plant Arabidopsis thaliana. Nature 408, 796–815 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35048692)

Comments 2: [Paste the full comment here.] Could you consider performing additional experiments to validate your findings, such as controlled tests on the plants' responses to climate stressors like drought or heat?
Response 2: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to emphasize this point. We would utilize those model plants to perform additional experiments to validate our findings, such as controlled tests on the plants' responses to climate stressors like drought or heat. 

Comments 3: [Paste the full comment here.] By addressing these comments and refining the manuscript, you can significantly improve your study's clarity, rigor, and impact. For the detailed comments, find the review report attached below.
Response 3: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the manuscripts to emphasize this point. Please refer Line 13-18, Line 23-27, Line 68-77, Line 86-96, and Line 188-199 in the revised manuscript.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you very much for trying to reply to my comments.

I just have major concern regarding this manuscript that is as follow: 

 Lines 190-195: However, I can understand what do you mean, but please pay attention that still you can not say this issue. Because, logically and sufficiently you should evaluate and compare these selected species or selected model plants based on the special design under different levels of various abiotic stresses for agromorphological traits in Korea or your regions to could verify this conclusion and detect the best model plant. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments 1: Dear authors, thank you very much for trying to reply to my comments.
I just have major concern regarding this manuscript that is as follow: 
Lines 190-195: However, I can understand what do you mean, but please pay attention that still you can not say this issue. Because, logically and sufficiently you should evaluate and compare these selected species or selected model plants based on the special design under different levels of various abiotic stresses for agromorphological traits in Korea or your regions to could verify this conclusion and detect the best model plant. 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your valuable feedback and insights. We understand and appreciate the concerns you raised, which point to some limitations of our current research. As you noted, this study primarily focuses on identifying candidate Poaceae species native to Korea that may be suitable as model plants, based solely on existing literature data.
We acknowledge that a comprehensive evaluation of selected species under different levels of abiotic stress and specific agromorphological traits in Korea is essential for validating their potential as model plants. However, this study serves as a preliminary step aimed at narrowing down candidate species for further investigation. The proposed selections provide a foundation upon which we intend to design future experiments for evaluating environmental resilience and specific agricultural traits under controlled and field conditions.
In our subsequent research phases, we will incorporate the experimental evaluations and specific environmental conditions as per your recommendation. Thank you again for your valuable input, which we will consider closely in the progression of our research.