Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The main objective of this manuscript is very interesting. However, I found a few items that can be improved.

 

Table 1: Please format with a little more care concerning word division.

Please write all taxonomic names using italic.

Line 400: I think this section does not belong to 2.11 Helianthus annuus (Common sunflower). Nevertheless, the next section is numbered as 2.14. Please correct.

Line 523: “The study involved analyzing the biochemical composition and presence of secondary metabolites in the plant extracts, which could be responsible for their antioxidant effects.” The authors did not analyze the samples, they did an extensive screening and reference work. Please rephrase.

Author Response

In accordance with reviewers' suggestions, the authors have made the following modifications to the manuscript. Changes made to the text are marked in yellow.

Reviewer 1

The main objective of this manuscript is very interesting. However, I found a few items that can be improved.

Table 1: Please format with a little more care concerning word division.

A: The authors have formatted Table 1 more carefully.

Please write all taxonomic names using italic

A: All taxonomic names of plants are in italics.

Line 400: I think this section does not belong to 2.11 Helianthus annuus (Common sunflower). Nevertheless, the next section is numbered as 2.14. Please correct.

A: The number sequence has been corrected.

Line 523: “The study involved analyzing the biochemical composition and presence of secondary metabolites in the plant extracts, which could be responsible for their antioxidant effects.” The authors did not analyze the samples, they did an extensive screening and reference work. Please rephrase.

A: The authors have corrected the previous sentence. “The work consisted of analyzing the information available in the scientific literature on the biochemical composition and the presence of secondary metabolites in plant extracts, which could be responsible for their antioxidant effects.”

Reviewer 2 Report

The study by Uuh-Narváez et al. provides an overview of rare and underutilized plants from Mexico, particularly from the Yucatan region. The authors selected 15 plants, briefly describing their use as food or in traditional medicine, major compounds, and available information about their antioxidant properties. They concluded that this collected information could promote pharmacological investigations into these species and support their potential use in drug discovery and medicinal purposes.

While ethnobotanical studies have historically played a crucial role in drug discovery, this study appears to lack coherence and sufficient detail to stimulate future interest in the described species. Specifically:

 

 -       - The introduction should clarify the rationale for focusing on the antioxidant properties of the plants rather than their traditional uses.

 

-       - The selection criteria for exploring certain medicinal plants should be clarified.

-     Briefly describing well-known medicinal plants like Capsicum annuum L., Echinacea purpurea L. and Helianthus annuus L., does not effectively promote an interest in these species and their potential medicinal applications. These species could be better described in the Introduction as examples of medicinal plants from Mexico currently exploited worldwide for their benefits.

-     Providing more in-depth information about the traditional use of the selected species could enhance scientific interest and stimulate further pharmacological research.

-       Prospects and potential challenges related to the use of these plants should also be considered.

-       Typos and inaccuracies (e.g., botanical names should be italicized) should be reviewed and corrected.

- A substantial revision of the entire manuscript is needed to enhance its clarity and soundness.

I recommend that the authors to submit a significantly improved and comprehensive version of the manuscript.

 

The manuscript should be checked carefully for more clarity

Author Response

In accordance with reviewers' suggestions, the authors have made the following modifications to the manuscript. Changes made to the text are marked in yellow.

The study by Uuh-Narváez et al. provides an overview of rare and underutilized plants from Mexico, particularly from the Yucatan region. The authors selected 15 plants, briefly describing their use as food or in traditional medicine, major compounds, and available information about their antioxidant properties. They concluded that this collected information could promote pharmacological investigations into these species and support their potential use in drug discovery and medicinal purposes.

While ethnobotanical studies have historically played a crucial role in drug discovery, this study appears to lack coherence and sufficient detail to stimulate future interest in the described species. Specifically:

  - The introduction should clarify the rationale for focusing on the antioxidant properties of the plants rather than their traditional uses.

A: the authors have added the information suggested by the reviewer. Lines 67-80.Marked in the yellow color.

   - The selection criteria for exploring certain medicinal plants should be clarified.

A: plant selection criteria added. Line 94-105.

-     Briefly describing well-known medicinal plants like Capsicum annuum L., Echinacea purpurea L. and Helianthus annuus L., does not effectively promote an interest in these species and their potential medicinal applications. These species could be better described in the Introduction as examples of medicinal plants from Mexico currently exploited worldwide for their benefits.

A: The task is completed, and we have provided a more thorough description of the medicinal applications of each plant species. Please review the highlighted changes in yellow. The primary objective of this study was to conduct a screening of various plant species native to the Yucatan region (referred to as Mayan plants) with potential medicinal applications. A more in-depth analysis of each plant species can be undertaken through separate articles dedicated to their detailed examination.

-     Providing more in-depth information about the traditional use of the selected species could enhance scientific interest and stimulate further pharmacological research.

A: Thank you for your recommendation. We have incorporated the necessary revisions. The primary objective of our study was to conduct a preliminary screening of various plant species, including underutilized native plants of the Yucatan region (referred to as Mayan plants), with potential applications on a global scale. For a more comprehensive analysis of each plant species, we intend to explore individual articles dedicated to their respective detailed examinations.

Prospects and potential challenges related to the use of these plants should also be considered.

A: Information suggested by the reviewer has been added. Lines 525-532.

-       Typos and inaccuracies (e.g., botanical names should be italicized) should be reviewed and corrected.

A: typographical errors have been corrected by the authors.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an interesting review, intending to improve the value of rare or underutilized plants of Yucatan region. Some problems were detected and improvements are necessary:

-authors intended to explore plants with antioxidant effects; however the uses associated with this effect should also be developed by authors

-authors selected several rare or underutilized plants of Yucatan region (Fig.1) – what was the criteria for this selection? Why these and not other plants? (this data must be included in the manuscript)

-“Based on the literature analysis and search of English and Spanish scientific infor-72 mation on botanical, plant biochemical, and antioxidant potential in the research data-73 bases Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge, and national databases of Mexico” – what were the keywords used? Timespan?

-“ Among the chosen specific plant-derived compounds presented in the selected plant species of the Yucatan region” - what was the criteria for this selection?

-improvements in chemical language are necessary – examples: “p-hydroxybenzoic acid” (p in italics) “A y b amyrin” “lactu-cin8-O-methylacrylate ” “myricetin-3-O-a-L-rhamnoside ” therefore all document must be rechecked and corrected

-“Figure 2 presents the secondary metabolites that were investigated last year” – why last year?

-section “2.14. Pouteria campechiana (H.B. & K) Baehni” appears after section “2.11. Helianthus annuus (Common sunflower)” – this must be corrected; in addition of the 15 selected plants, it seems that only 14 were described

-some of the described plants are well known and therefore more literature covering chemical composition and bioactivity than the presented describing them exist

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

In accordance with reviewers' suggestions, the authors have made the following modifications to the manuscript. Changes made to the text are marked in yellow.

This is an interesting review, intending to improve the value of rare or underutilized plants of Yucatan region. Some problems were detected and improvements are necessary:

-authors intended to explore plants with antioxidant effects; however the uses associated with this effect should also be developed by authors

A: the authors have added the information suggested by the reviewer. Lines 67-80.

-authors selected several rare or underutilized plants of Yucatan region (Fig.1) – what was the criteria for this selection? Why these and not other plants? (this data must be included in the manuscript)

A: plant selection criteria added. Line 94-105.

-“Based on the literature analysis and search of English and Spanish scientific information on botanical, plant biochemical, and antioxidant potential in the research databases Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge, and national databases of Mexico” – what were the keywords used? Timespan?

A: plant selection criteria added. Line 94-105.

-“ Among the chosen specific plant-derived compounds presented in the selected plant species of the Yucatan region” - what was the criteria for this selection?

A: plant selection criteria added. Line 94-105.

-improvements in chemical language are necessary – examples: “p-hydroxybenzoic acid” (p in italics) “A y b amyrin” “lactu-cin8-O-methylacrylate ” “myricetin-3-O-a-L-rhamnoside ” therefore all document must be rechecked and corrected

A: compound names were corrected according to reviewers' suggestions.

-“Figure 2 presents the secondary metabolites that were investigated last year” – why last year?

A: Thank you for your feedback. To clarify, we intended to refer to secondary metabolites that have been identified. The sentence has been revised to: "Figure 2 illustrates the identified secondary metabolites, but it is important to note that a more comprehensive investigation of other recognized classes of natural products is required."

-section “2.14. Pouteria campechiana (H.B. & K) Baehni” appears after section “2.11. Helianthus annuus (Common sunflower)” – this must be corrected; in addition of the 15 selected plants, it seems that only 14 were described

A: The authors have corrected the sequence indicated by the reviewer.

-some of the described plants are well known and therefore more literature covering chemical composition and bioactivity than the presented describing them exist

A: Thank you for the suggestion. Indeed, we made an effort to incorporate literature that aligns with the conceptual framework of our table's composition, specifically focusing on literature relevant to applied studies. This was done to ensure the information presented can be beneficial for future research endeavors.

Reviewer 4 Report

Generally, the manuscript is suitable for publication in Future Pharmacology. Three brief comments are included below.

1. The names of all compounds in Table 1 should be checked by the authors for correct spelling. In addition, they should all be written in English.
2. Latin names of plants included in the manuscript should be written in italics. Please check throughout the manuscript.
3. The 'Perspectives' section, according to the retained numbering, should be numbered 3 and 'Conclusions' numbered 4.

Author Response

In accordance with reviewer' suggestions, the authors have made the following modifications to the manuscript. Changes made to the text are marked in yellow.

 

1. The names of all compounds in Table 1 should be checked by the authors for correct spelling. In addition, they should all be written in English.

A: Thanks. Its done.

1. Latin names of plants included in the manuscript should be written in italics. Please check throughout the manuscript.

A: Thanks. The required changes were made. The Latin names of plants in Italic.

1. The 'Perspectives' section, according to the retained numbering, should be numbered 3 and 'Conclusions' numbered 4.

A: Thanks for the comment Its done.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have improved the work by addressing my queries effectively. Some inaccuracies, such as the classifier botanist's name not requiring italics, will be rectified during the proofreading process.

The language is clear and appropriate.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Improvements were done and now the manuscript is more acceptable for publication.

Minor editing of English language required