Revealing the Inhibition of Tea Cultivar ‘Ziyan’ Root Growth Caused by High Nitrogen Based on Physiological, Metabolite, and Transcriptome Analyses
, Wei Chen 1,3,†, Dandan Tang 1,3, Xiaoqin Tan 1, Yang Yang 4, Liqiang Tan 1,3,* and Qian Tang 1,3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is well designed and presented study.
Minor changes needed are addressed bellow:
The title should contain that Ziyan is tea variety, since not all of the readership is familiar with trivial names.
lines 18-19. something is wrong with this statement, one value more that feature referred to. Please, check up
line 21. I have seen that abbreviation are explained in MM chapter, but please explain where firstly applied as well (e.g. KEGG)
line 29. the correct form is (Camelia sinensis (L.) O. Kunze). Please change.
line 87. please provide an information how long was photoperiod light/dark time e.g. 16/8h?
lines 101-102. You have used twice kit within the same sentence. Please, reformulate.
In some chapter You used tea (e.g. 3.1) in other Ziyan. It makes confusion that that was not the same variety. Please, unify or precise, everywhere what it is referred to.
Do not start subtitles or sentences with abbreviations (e.g. 3.3; 3.31; 3.32; 4.1). Also line 305. You have started the sentence with Phe. There are many within the text, please correct.
lines 320-322. It sounds odd. Please reformulate.
The graphs are clear and supplementary material is informative.
Author Response
Dear editor and reviewers,
We are grateful to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions on improving our manuscript. These comments and suggestions are very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. Based on these suggestions, we have made careful modifications on the manuscript. Revised portions are marked in red in the manuscript. Please find below our responses to the comments.
Sincerely yours,
Qian Tang
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: The title should contain that Ziyan is tea variety, since not all of the readership is familiar with trivial names.
Response 1: Revised as suggested. We illustrated Ziyan is a tea variety in the title and changed the title to “Revealing the inhibition of Tea Cultivar 'Ziyan' root growth caused by high nitrogen based on physiological, metabolite, and transcriptome analyses”.
Point 2: lines 18-19. something is wrong with this statement, one value more that feature referred to. Please, check up
Response 2: Thank you for your correction. We have corrected and added a feature in line 19.
Point 3: line 21. I have seen that abbreviation are explained in MM chapter, but please explain where firstly applied as well (e.g. KEGG)
Response 3: Revised as suggested (line 21). We have changed KEGG to ‘Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genome (KEGG)’.
Point 4: line 29. the correct form is (Camelia sinensis (L.) O. Kunze). Please change.
Response 4: Thank you for your correction. We have corrected in line 29.
Point 5: line 87. please provide an information how long was photoperiod light/dark time e.g. 16/8h?
Response 5: Revised as suggested and the photoperiod light/dark time was added in line 87-88.
Point 6: lines 101-102. You have used twice kit within the same sentence. Please, reformulate.
Response 6: We have checked and revised in line 101.
Point 7: In some chapter You used tea (e.g. 3.1) in other Ziyan. It makes confusion that that was not the same variety. Please, unify or precise, everywhere what it is referred to.
Response 7: Thank you for your considerations. We haved modified and changed ‘tea (e.g. 3.1;3.2;4.2)’ to ‘Ziyan’. This experiment used the tea variety 'Ziyan' as the experimental material, so We unified it in the manuscript.
Point 8: Do not start subtitles or sentences with abbreviations (e.g. 3.3; 3.31; 3.32; 4.1). Also line 305. You have started the sentence with Phe. There are many within the text, please correct.
Response 8: Revised as suggested.
Point 9: lines 320-322. It sounds odd. Please reformulate.
Response 9: We have revised in line 320-327.
Point 10: The graphs are clear and supplementary material is informative.
Response 10: Modified in the text.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Very complex work where results are supported by quality methodology. I have only one comment to general design of experiments. Authors used only tea genotype Ziyan, which is maybe more tolerant to high N cultivation, but it would be more valuable research if authors involve also some N sensitive genotypes or another different genotype of tea. Please, it could be appropriately to enlarge discussion about tea genotypes sensitivity to nitrogen within cultivation.
Author Response
Dear editor and reviewers,
We are grateful to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions on improving our manuscript.These comments and suggestions are very helpful for revising and improving our manuscript. Based on these suggestions, we have made careful modifications on the manuscript.Revised portions are marked in red in the manuscript. Please find below our responses to the comments.
Sincerely yours,
Qian Tang
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: Very complex work where results are supported by quality methodology. I have only one comment to general design of experiments. Authors used only tea genotype Ziyan, which is maybe more tolerant to high N cultivation, but it would be more valuable research if authors involve also some N sensitive genotypes or another different genotype of tea. Please, it could be appropriately to enlarge discussion about tea genotypes sensitivity to nitrogen within cultivation.
Response 1: Thanks for your thoughtful suggestions, we have added some discussion about other tea genotypes sensitivity to nitrogen within cultivation in line 402-404 and line 408-411 and also added the references of Jagadish and Shanmugaselvan. 2016 and Ruan et al. 2019 in the references list.
