Investigating the Aromatic Compound Changes in Table Grape Varieties during Growth and Development, Using HS-SPME-GC/MS
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this manuscript, Sugaya and colleagues investigated the aroma profiles for three important table grape cultivars in berry development and found specific metabolic features of Kyoho’, ‘Shine Muscat’ and ‘Ryuho’. The results could be used in grape breeding by designing the flavors of table grapes. I like the presentation of the manuscript in general, but I also have some major and minor comments for the authors to consider.
1. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? The language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision.
2. The cultivation of ‘Ryuho’ grape should be limited. The significance and application of studying its aroma components need to be emphasized in the discussion.
3. Considering the brevity and clarity of the article, starting from Figure 3, when the annotation part of the chart is the same, it can be simplified, such as Figure 5 and Figure 6.
4. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?
5. The results of aroma changes in different varieties at different growth stages are interesting. In the result part and the discussion part of the manuscript, please change a more clear statement to describe its regularity.
6. The characteristics of aroma types represented by different table grape varieties are described vaguely in this manuscript. In the discussion section, please use other relevant references to describe this section in detail.
Author Response
Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 1)
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions for Authors
In this manuscript, Sugaya and colleagues investigated the aroma profiles for three important table grape cultivars in berry development and found specific metabolic features of ‘Kyoho’, ‘Shine Muscat’ and ‘Ryuho’. The results could be used in grape breeding by designing the flavors of table grapes. I like the presentation of the manuscript in general, but I also have some major and minor comments for the authors to consider.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. We also appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to our manuscript during rounds of critical review process.
- Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? The language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision.
Response：All these problems have been solved through full text English correction.
- The cultivation of ‘Ryuho’ grape should be limited. The significance and application of studying its aroma components need to be emphasized in the discussion.
Response：Thank you for giving us the comment about our manuscript. Its potential practical application was added.
- Considering the brevity and clarity of the article, starting from Figure 3, when the annotation part of the chart is the same, it can be simplified, such as Figure 5 and Figure 6.
Response：All these problems have been solved.
- Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?
Response：Yes. Data analysis is strictly calculated according to the formula, and Microsoft Office Excel, SPSS 17.0, and the JMP software were used to analyze the data. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t-tests were used.
- The results of aroma changes in different varieties at different growth stages are interesting. In the result part and the discussion part of the manuscript, please change a more clear statement to describe its regularity.
Response：Thank you for giving us the comment about our manuscript. All these problems have been solved.
- The characteristics of aroma types represented by different table grape varieties are described vaguely in this manuscript. In the discussion section, please use other relevant references to describe this section in detail.
Response：Thank you for giving us the comment about our manuscript. Other relevant references was used.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
For minor edit suggestion, please resubmit with numbered lines.
Minor language issues included:
* The use of the word grain in place of berry.
* A few words out of place or "the" missing.
Figure 3: Consider changing the y axis label to read "Total volatile concentration".
In Intro/Discussion Section:
No need to write out Vitis vinifera/ Vitis labrusca after Vitis was already laid out earlier in the text.
Author Response
Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 2)
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions for Authors
For minor edit suggestion, please resubmit with numbered lines.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript.
Minor language issues included:
- The use of the word grain in place of berry.
Response：The word of berry has already changed in this manuscript.
- A few words out of place or "the" missing.
Response：All these problems have been solved through full text English correction.
3.Figure 3: Consider changing the y axis label to read "Total volatile concentration".
Response：The concentration involved in the article was volatile concentration. Therefore, the figure of ‘Total concentration’ is concise. It has been explained in detail in the article.
- In Intro/Discussion Section:No need to write out Vitis vinifera/ Vitis labrusca after Vitis was already laid out earlier in the text.
Response：All these problems have been solved.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The revision is attached in a separate document.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 3)
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Aroma compounds changes in table-grape varieties by HS-SPME-GC/MS during growth and development. Topic of manuscript is interesting and valuable and is within the thematic scope of the journal. The hypothesis is sufficiently explained in Introduction part. The experiment is properly planned and used analytical procedure is appropriate. However there are some doubts and weaknesses which should be clarified and revised during revision process. My general and specific comments are given below:
General comment:
All results were presented on very similar Figures. It is difficult to follow, and could be boring for the future readers. I am very sorry for that comment. Thus I suggest to change Figure 5 or Figure into the Table. The manuscript presents good work it would be a pity not to show it well.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. We also appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to our manuscript during rounds of critical review process.
Abstract: First sentence is huge and needs reformulation. Please divide first sentence into two. The same comment for the aim in the Introduction part.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. All these problems have been solved in introduction part and abstract.
Results and discussion:
- Page 4: please explain what does it mean total aroma content ? Sum of all volatile
compounds responsible for aroma ? Please explain also in the manuscript.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. Total aroma content means the total amount of 30 volatile aroma compounds. This part has already explained in manuscript.
- How many volatile compounds were detected and how many compounds were identified.Please explain.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. More than 40 compounds were detected in the experiment, and only 30 volatile aroma compounds were screened.This part has already explained in manuscript.
- What does it mean “The proportion of aroma types” (page 5). You think about volatilecompounds ?
Response：30 volatile aroma components were divided into 6 types. We calculated the percentage of different aroma types in the total amount.
- Figures:The captions in the Figures are not clear. For example, in Figure 1 the DAFB should be It is not known what the numbers 10, 30, 50 …… mean. In all Figures also please explain DAFB. The less important information in caption may be written in smaller letters. Please consider Figures should be self readable.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. This part has already changed in manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
The authors investigated the aromatic compounds of different aroma types of table grape varieties and deeply understand the changes of aroma compounds in the process of berry growth and development, the skin and flesh of three table grape varieties (‘Kyoho’, ‘Shine Muscat’ and ‘Ryuho’) in different growth and development stages were used to determine the aromatic com-pounds by headspace solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, and principal component analysis was used to analyze the aroma com-pounds of different varieties in different periods. The manuscript is well-structured and well-discussed. However, some points should be checked and corrected before it's accepted in this journal.
Therefore, according to my comments, I recommended the publication of the paper after minor revision.
1. The abstract need more clarity.
2. In the conclusion section. The authors should add the significance of this research and its potential practical application.
3. The MS English needs to be improved. The article's English must be carefully checked for grammatical errors.
Author Response
Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 4)
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors investigated the aromatic compounds of different aroma types of table grape varieties and deeply understand the changes of aroma compounds in the process of berry growth and development, the skin and flesh of three table grape varieties (‘Kyoho’, ‘Shine Muscat’ and ‘Ryuho’) in different growth and development stages were used to determine the aromatic com-pounds by headspace solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, and principal component analysis was used to analyze the aroma com-pounds of different varieties in different periods. The manuscript is well-structured and well-discussed. However, some points should be checked and corrected before it's accepted in this journal.
Therefore, according to my comments, I recommended the publication of the paper after minor revision.
Response：Thank you for giving us the positive decision about our manuscript. We also appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to our manuscript during rounds of critical review process.
- The abstract need more clarity.
Response：The abstract has been modified as suggested.
- In the conclusion section. The authors should add the significance of this research and its potential practical application.
Response：Thank you for giving us the comment about our manuscript. Its potential practical application was added.
- The MS English needs to be improved. The article's English must be carefully checked for grammatical errors.
Response：Thank you for giving us the comment about our manuscript. All these problems have been solved through full text English correction.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Manuscript was sufficiently revised by the Authors.
