Responses of Sesamum indicum to Allelopathy of Coniferous and Broadleaved Trees

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I accept the authors' explanation as to the instrumental analyses I have suggested. For the future, I recommend collaboration with other scientists who have such equipment. This greatly enriches the scientific workshop and raises the level of the manuscript, while providing a broad insight into the issues discussed.

Author Response

Thans for your valuable suggestion on our article.

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic is interesting; however, a major revision is necessary. First of all, authors should respond to some crucial questions in order to justify their choices and methods. In particular: a) why Sesamum is selected? This is an arable crop not sown in forests! Species like Avena sativa and Lemna minor are far more well known and widely used as bioindicators, b) How competition effects were avoided in the experiments? Authors should prove that the effects seen were solely due to allelopathy (are they?) and even isolate secondary metabolites from the extracts, c) who says that the mixtures of leaf extracts are also present in the same or similar concentrations in nature as well? We need evidence on that. Furthermore, a major English language revision is also required. Authors are also encouraged to pay attention to the comments below:

 

In abstract: The types and quantities of allelopathic chemicals are different in coniferous and broadleaved trees; studying the responses of some sensitive plants, such as certain crops, to allelopathy mediated by the leaf extracts of coniferous and broadleaved trees would be an effective technique to evaluate the relationships among species in a mixed forest: split the sentence

 

In the abstract: did not exhibit significant differences in the direction of the allelopathic effect on S. indicum; replace "of" with "on"

 

promoted the allelopathic effects of S. indicum: as above

 

neutralized the allelopathic effects of S. indicum: as above

 

p.2:  And they cause the species composition of different trees to display certain differences (Oracz et al., 2012): avoid starting sendences with "and"

 

p.4: This study evaluates the effects of allelopathic substances from different species on germination and seedling growth in relatively sensitive plant seeds: why this species is "relatively sensitive"?

 

Figure 2 legend: not equations needed here (include them in the figure if necessary)

 

Table needs standard errors or LSD values: it cannot be there without any statistical analysis

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

A major English language revision is required (please ask the help on English native speakers)

Author Response

Comments 1: Why Sesamum is selected? This is an arable crop not sown in forests!

Species like Avena sativa and Lemna minor are far more well known and widely used as bioindicators.

Response: In line 180,I explained why sesame was chosen as the research object.

Comments 2: How competition effects were avoided in the experiments? Authors should prove that the effects seen were solely due to allelopathy (are they?) and even isolate secondary metabolites from the extracts, who says that the mixtures of leaf extracts are also present in the same or similar concentrations in nature as well? We need evidence on that. Furthermore, a major English language revision is also required. Authors are also encouraged to pay attention to the comments below:

 

Response: In the experiment, the indoor filter paper culture dish method was used to study specific concentrations of leaf extracts, thereby controlling for other environmental variables and reducing the impact of competitive effects.

By comparing the effects of single leaf extract and mixed leaf extract on seed germination and seedling growth of S.indicum, we were able to evaluate the effects of allelopathy rather than other competitive factors.

Due to the passage of time, we regret that we are unable to conduct further experiments to confirm that the concentration of the leaf extract mixture in nature is the same as in the experiment.

 

Comments 3:In the abstract: did not exhibit significant differences in the direction of the allelopathic effect on S. indicum; replace "of" with "on".

Response: I have replaced all the "of" with "on" in the article.

 

Comments 4:And they cause the species composition of different trees to display certain differences (Oracz et al., 2012): avoid starting sendences with "and".

Response: In the line 77, I’ve deleted “and”.

Comments 5: This study evaluates the effects of allelopathic substances from different species on germination and seedling growth in relatively sensitive plant seeds: why this species is "relatively sensitive"?

Response: In line 176,it’s because S. indicum seeds have strict requirements for temperature, moisture, light, and soil conditions, and are sensitive to changes in the growth environment, making them excellent experimental materials.

Comments 6: Figure 2 legend: not equations needed here (include them in the figure if necessary)

Response: I’ve deleted it.

Comments 7:Table needs standard errors or LSD values: it cannot be there without any statistical analysis.

Response:In line 273,I added the statistical significance was evaluated at P< 0.05 level about it.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors--I was delighted to have the chance to review your work about differing tree leaf extracts on apparent allelopathic response of the agronomic crop of sesame. As you can tell from my comments in the attached manuscript copy, I was quite favorably impressed by your abstract, your literature review and your methods. However, when I started reviewing your results section, I was awkwardly caught up short. It appears (several times) that your text makes statements about differences between treatments--and the relative magnitude of those differences--in spite of a lack of statistical difference as expressed in your tables. For example, such statements are made in the results text about seedling height; however, the accompanying table shows no statistical differences in that parameter. Given that this appears to be an ongoing issue (more than one time), I have relatively little confidence that the results are accurately presented. With some doubt about your presentation of the results, I cannot be fully confident that either your discussion or conclusions are well-grounded in appropriately interpreted results. And that takes me back to your abstract--perhaps those summary statements are less than fully justified?

Concerned reviewer.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I marked a few instances of English usage concerns in the attached document; I encourage you to tackle a fullsome review of English usage throughout. However, I urgently caution you that the primary concern is about data interpretation--please address the above concerns before tidying up the usage of English in your manuscript.

Author Response

Comments 1:The accompanying table shows no statistical differences in that parameter. Given that this appears to be an ongoing issue (more than one time).

Response:In order to improve the experimental report and clearly demonstrate the statistical analysis results, we have added standard deviation (SD) to describe the degree of data dispersion, and used one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD testing methods in practical research (as described in section 2.3 of the research method). These methods can help us determine whether the differences between different treatment groups are statistically significant.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors have addressed some of the raised issues. However, I would like the authors to put some effort and clearly reflect on how they ensured that their findings are not merely due to competition. Furthermore, a chemical analysis of the extracts is needed in order to highlight the specific metabolites involved in the allelopathic potential. Even in the revised version, this is missing and it is a major shortcome.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Satisfactory quality of English language, however; the help of a native English speaker would be great and improve a lot the overall quality

Author Response

Comments 1:Authors have addressed some of the raised issues. However, I would like the authors to put some effort and clearly reflect on how they ensured that their findings are not merely due to competition. Furthermore, a chemical analysis of the extracts is needed in order to highlight the specific metabolites involved in the allelopathic potential. Even in the revised version, this is missing and it is a major shortcome.

Response:I'm very sorry about that. Because the experiment time has passed for a long time, it is now impossible to detect allelochemicals, and redesign more detailed experiments to ensure that the experiment is only affected by allelopathy.

During the experiment, each treatment group repeated the experiment several times to improve the reliability and statistical significance of the data.Maybe this aspect can also reduce the influence of other factors.

 

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your thoughtful responses to my suggestions.

Author Response

Thans for your valuable suggestion on our article.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I express my thanks to the authors for their efforts. I could understand from the article that in mixed forests, species interact in complex ways, with allelopathy—chemical interactions between plants—playing a key role. Coniferous and broadleaved trees produce different types and amounts of allelopathic chemicals. To study this, leaf extracts from four trees—Metasequoia glyptostroboides, Cedrus deodara, Liquidambar formosana, and Platanus acerifolia—were tested on sesame (Sesamum indicum) seed germination and seedling growth.

The results showed that:

1. All four leaf extracts inhibited the germination and growth of sesame. The strength of the inhibitory effect was: L. formosana > M. glyptostroboides > C. deodara > P. acerifolia.
2. No significant difference was found between coniferous and broadleaved species in their overall allelopathic effects.
3. When coniferous and broadleaved tree leaf extracts were mixed, some combinations increased the inhibitory effects, while others reduced them.

These findings, with their potential to revolutionize the management of mixed forest ecosystems, could pave the way for more effective and sustainable practices.

I have some suggestions-

1. Please explain the background of the study more clearly. Why did you choose these four species of plants specifically?

2. Usually, allelopathy experiments are conducted on lettuce plants.  Could you please explain why you chose Sesame for this experiment?

3. I could not find any explanation about CK. Please explain CK in line number 268.

4. Please check the punctuation throughout the manuscript. For example, line number 42, 54, 148  

5. Check the scientific names. 

6. Line 163-165, the sentence looks irrelevant to the context. Isn't it?

7. Please improve grammar and appropriate wording throughout the manuscript. 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Grammar and wording can be improved. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The main drawback of this manuscript is that the authors did not perform identification of the compounds in the extract obtained. For this reason, it is not known what is responsible for the final effect. There is also a lack of visualisation of the experience in the form of photos of the plants and the differences between them. There is now a standard.

Depending on the extraction temperature, extraction time, solvent used, degree of fineness of the material, the quantitative and qualitative composition of the extract will vary. In this case, we cannot say anything about the extract. For this reason, without supplementing the analyses with HPLC-Ms or at least GC-Ms (with rerivatisation), I cannot recommend this manuscript for publication.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Overall, the linguistic side of the manuscript is good, however, I would recommend a slight linguistic correction.