Next Article in Journal
Enhancing the Yield Potential of Soybean after Magneto-Priming: Detailed Study on Its Relation to Underlying Physiological Processes
Next Article in Special Issue
Altitudinal Genetic Variation of Pinus oocarpa Seedling Emergence in the Southern Mountains, Oaxaca, Mexico
Previous Article in Journal
Acknowledgment to the Reviewers of Seeds in 2022
Previous Article in Special Issue
Anatomy and Germination of Erythrina velutina Seeds under a Different Imbibition Period in Gibberellin
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Evaluation of Germination under Different Storage Conditions of Four Endemic Plant Species from Ethiopia: Implications for Ex Situ Conservation in Seed Banks

Seeds 2023, 2(1), 45-59; https://doi.org/10.3390/seeds2010005
by Sinework Dagnachew 1,*, Demel Teketay 2, Sebsebe Demissew 3 and Tesfaye Awas 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Seeds 2023, 2(1), 45-59; https://doi.org/10.3390/seeds2010005
Submission received: 15 December 2022 / Revised: 8 January 2023 / Accepted: 27 January 2023 / Published: 6 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Parameters of Seed Germination in Wild Plant Species)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Reading your paper was interesting. The practical contribution of article is great since the effect of storage conditions and storage period on the seed germination of four Ethiopian endemic species were investigated. The knowledge of the optimal storage conditions is necessary for the conservation of these species.

All the comments and questions which were made on the manuscript (attached file) have to be taken account and answered.


Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1

We were pleased to have an opportunity to revise our manuscript entitled  “Evaluation of germination under different storage conditions of four endemic plant species from Ethiopia: implications for ex situ conservation in seed banks”( seed-2133017). The comments were useful to improve the quality of the manuscript. We thank you for the very useful feedback. We have revised our manuscript as per the comments with track change review suggestions. The changes we made are marked using “Track Changes” in the revised manuscript.

Please see the attachment for our response

With best regards,

Sinework Dagnachew and coauthors 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Evaluation of germination under different storage conditions of  four endemic plant species from Ethiopia: implications for 3 ex situ conservation in seed banks - the manuscripts concern about conditions for proper storage of 4 Ethiopian species for conservation reasons. The authors prepared work for determined protocol for gene banks. The manuscripts cover description of the results but it needs to be supplemented in different sorts of  information before publication.

Affilation no no. 3 references for Demissew

Introduction section don't cover answer for question why this research are so important. Majority of the information is connected with explanation of the rules of the seed conservation standard that is well explained in ISTA rules. Authors should only mark the most important point for their topic with reference to review the topic if it is important for readers. Authors not shown characteristics of chosen species, usage, information connected with climatic changes. I found some information in table 1 but it should be highlighted in the introduction. No information about categorisation of these 4 species into this group of seed storage behavior or type of dormanyc that is important information. 

The species name in 3.1.1. to 3.1.4 should be in italic. It would be better to use description to characterize changes between point 3.1.1. and 3.2.1. now in both places are names of species without italics.

 

in section 2.3. I don't see an explanation why for one species only one version of the test was made in RT but not in 4 degrees. Why? It  should be explained here or in the results.

 

line 160 - "329 - no. in bibliography need to be checked.

 

line 320, 326, 333, 336 etc. - improper  "+4oC" - should be corrected in all documents.

 

line 329 - "DiScussion" the upper letter in inappropriate places  are visible in all documents, it should be revised by an author.

 

Figures fig. 3 B and 4 B the Follosa should be lowercase. Why does an Author not put the Tukey test letters on the graphs?

 

line 343 to many space before bracket

 

line 36 why there is a conclusion after thirteen months?

 

line 362-364 changes in style of font, line 362 after coma upper  letter "Storage"

 

line 369 extra space before "According"

 

line 396, 412 should be lowercase in "orthodox"

 

line 397, 407, 415 check if extra space before new sentence

 

line 410 and should not be italic

 

In general, discussion lacks link to the figures to support the findings.

 

line 414 not in but is

 

Bibliography section should be chcecked in style and possibly free space.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

We were pleased to have an opportunity to revise our manuscript entitled  “Evaluation of germination under different storage conditions of four endemic plant species from Ethiopia: implications for ex situ conservation in seed banks”( seed-2133017). We thank you for the very useful feedback on the earlier version of our manuscript. The comments were useful to improve the quality of the manuscript. We have revised our manuscript as per the comments and suggestions. We have checked the grammars in the revised manuscript carefully. We have also checked references and have found all references cited are appearing in the text. 

Please see the attachment 

Regards,

Sinework Dagnachew and the coauthor 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear editor.

I was very pleased during reading your manuscript entitled "Evaluation of germination under different storage conditions of four endemic plant species from Ethiopia: implications for ex situ conservation in seed banks". The context is well presented and the study seems accurate. I was also comfortable to read that there is interest in field prospections and herbarium recollections still.

Nevertheless, apart from english stiling and reordering paragraphs, I propose changes and new ideas in order to improve the quality of your paper.

Regards,

Yoy reviewer.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reivewer 3

We were pleased to have an opportunity to revise our manuscript entitled  “Evaluation of germination under different storage conditions of four endemic plant species from Ethiopia: implications for ex situ conservation in seed banks”( seed-2133017). We thank you for the very useful feedback on the earlier version of our manuscript and are pleased to submit the revised version. The comments were useful to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Please see the attachment for our response,

Regards,

Sinework Dagnachew and coauthors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

I appreciate the modifications you made in the manuscript. It has been significantly improved, compared with the first version. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for considering my reviews.

Back to TopTop