Characterization of Biominerals in Cacteae Species by FTIR

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study identified biominerals in 5 species of cacti from Mexico. In the attached file, I made several suggestions, mostly to correct grammar. The authors mistakenly use the term wavelengths when they are actually referring to wavenumbers. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We appreciate all your modifications done in the manuscript. All of the were accepted and now in the revised version they are marked in yellow. The various sentences that were not clear were rewrriten and also marked in yellow. However, the context of the text was modified because the paragraph was changed it is in gray. 

We considered that modifications done the manuscript is stronger and open a field of study for more members of the Cacteae, especially the genus Mammillaria.   

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript entitled  “Characterization of biominerals in Cactaceae species by FTIR” by A. de la Rosa,  A. Maceda and T. Terrazas report a series of data about biominerals in Cactaceae. Though the data presented could be of potential interest authors need to carry out a profound revision of them and the information presented in the manuscript

 

The authors have made an interesting article in the field of the production and detection of biominerals in plants, but it should be improved by following the guidelines below.

- The most interesting part of the work is the detection of biominerals in the different tissues, undoubtedly using FTIR techniques. However, highlighting the treatment of the sample is poorly explained, especially the one that refers to this separation of tissues. They should include a real image of how they extract the parts of the plants (apical, middle and basal) and their relationship with the structures of the epidermal cells, cortical parenchyma, vascular tissue and pith. In addition, the studies of anatomy are very partial, including only the epidermis, hypodermis, and cortical parenchyma tissue, which contradicts what is exposed in the images of Fig. 1, since no vascular parenchyma tissue or pith is observed in any case.

-In the  point 2.1. Analysis by FTIR, the authors  should include the meaning of the acronym FTIR.  I should state 1- Wave number, cm−1; 2.  Assignment. 3 Characterisation. In addition, show the respective bibliographic citations with numbers to avoid having to repeat them several times.

- Fig. 1It  should be pointed out in the text the correspondence of the axis. It is very difficult to follow, it would help to point out  inside the figure the correspondence of each spectrum. When the authors discuss the image it is impossible to find the peaks that appear in the text.

- In the microscopy figures I recommend deleting the scales of the images and or insert scales with higher quality or simply leave them mentioned in the text as it has been done. The scales are of poor quality and in some cases twisted, distorted the image

- If the authors have reflected different plant tissues, they should explain the similarities or differences between them. Nothing is said about the peaks not assigned to which compounds, for example cellulose.

The authors mentioned in the introduction that FTIR technique detects magnesium biominerals and other oxalates. Nothing is said about magnesium oxalates in results or discussion. The authors could include a paragraph dealing with their detection / non-detection.

- The discussion is very limited, the Ca oxalates in Cactaceae are already known, as the authors point out, however, the confirmation of silicated compounds is poorly evidenced.

 The subsection  of calcium carbonate biomineral is too short to be completely separated. They should be either include it in another section or develop it a little more.

- The authors comment that they have found silica bodies in the samples of some species studied only in the hypodermis and that they could be considered a taxonomic marker. What differences are observed at the taxonomic level in these species?. The article focuses a lot on the value of biominerals in taxonomy, without providing differences between the treated species. However, I find the discussion of the importance of silicon and its role in physiological and nutritional functions in some edible species such as Echinocactus texensis poor.

- Finally I think it is necessary to complement with other microscopic techniques SEM, EDX for the location of biominerals and X-ray techniques to confirm the silicated minerals. Or at least discuss the value of this type of technique in the detection of biominerals by tissues.

 

Author Response

In the revised manuscript you will find all your comments incorporated in gray color. The attach file gives answer to each particular point you addressed. We appreciate all your comments that allow us to clarify several points. We consider the manuscript has now more robust and better explained sections as for Material and Methods, Results and Discussion.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor

The manuscript entitled  “Characterization of biominerals in Cactaceae species by FTIR” by A. de la Rosa,  A. Maceda and T. Terrazas report a series of data about biominerals in Cactaceae. The authors have made a change to everything that was asked of them and have made changes to the text in this regard.

Although I am not a native of the English language, I think a revision of the work in this language should be carried out.