Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The communication title “ Improvements for the micropropagation of hybrid hazelnut (C. 2 americana x C. avellana)” is conducted well and this study will help to resolve the hurdles in  micropropagation of hazelnut. Accepted with minor changes, my comments for authors are as follows:

1-      I suggest authors to conduct statistical analysis on the control, P1, and P2 protocols for figure 1.

2-      For figure 3 the results of “Dark/Light” and “Light” treatments needs to be statistically analyzed.

3-      Add the method you use for the statistical analysis in the figure legends and material and methods section.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

See Response Letter attached.

Thank you so much,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

line 53 - rooting often depends on the time of the year and flowering see (A Freiman et al.- Plant Science, 164-176; 2015 and Biology 2021, 10(9), 937) 

Figure 1 should be replaced with a table with actual numbers. 

Figure 3 needs error bars for comparison and statistical analysis.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

See Response Letter attached.

Thank you so much,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In this short communication to Horticulturae, Pincelli-Souza and collaborators report efficient protocols for sterilization of shoot segments of hazelnut and in vitro rooting. For this type of article, the number of figures is enough; however, the authors fail to present consistent statistical analyses for quantitative data. In Fig. 1 although standard errors are indicated in the figure legend, these data are not shown in the graph. Additionally, no statistical analysis is indicated for this figure. For fig. 3, no standard error and statistical analysis are mentioned.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

See Response Letter attached.

Thank you so much,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

In this revised manuscript, the authors have addressed all the issues indicated by the reviewers, including the one about the type of paper selected. At this point, I suggest the following:

- Table 1. Include: the standard error is shown for the percentages calculated.

-Figure 1. Change Error bars show standard errors by Values are means ± standard errors.  

Author Response

Thank you! We made the changes requested.