Peer Review History

Original SubmissionDecember 17, 2019
Decision Letter - Federico Brilli, Editor

PONE-D-19-34824

Cell wall O-acetyl and methyl esterification patterns of leaves reflected in atmospheric emission signatures of acetic acid and methanol

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr Dewhirst,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. Your manuscript has been peer-reviewed by two experts in the field. As you can see from the comments reported below, both the reviewers found your study very interesting and worthy of publication following some revisions. In short, reviewer #1 asked to expand the ‘Introduction’ and ‘Discussion’ sections to describe more fully the importance of this research work, while reviewer #2 arose some points to be addressed, particularly a more correct presentation of the statistical analysis.

Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that includes the reviewers' requests.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by 07th of March, 2020. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Federico Brilli, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1.         You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission. 

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2.    If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I very much enjoyed this manuscript and have an unusual recommendation for the authors. I found the Intro and Disc sections well written but somewhat telegraphic. I'm concerned that the significance of the realists may not come across to the general reader. I encourage the authors to consider expanding these sections to discuss the importance of their work at greater length.

Also, I did not see the data link that, I believe, PLOS One requires. If I missed it, I apologize. If it's not yet in the ms., it should be added

Reviewer #2: The manuscript “Cell wall O-acetyl and methyl esterification patterns of leaves reflected in atmospheric emission signatures of acetic acid and methanol” regards to the quantification of total meOH and AA emissions in Populus trichocarpa desiccated leaves at different developmental stages were taking into account the cell wall acetylation and methylation content highlighting the quantification of AA/meOH emission ratios as a potential tool for rapid phenotype screening of structural carbohydrate esterification. I consider the manuscript very interesting and topical in the field of plant physiography and biofuels. Developing a method based on two experimental approaches, able to dynamically quantify acetic acid simultaneously with methanol is very innovative. I find the presentation of the work quite good and I don't find too many problems in the language. However, there are some aspects that need to be reviewed before the work can be presentable.

Comments:

1) The introduction should be reviewed trying to replace some slightly dated references (Micheli et al etc). The role of PME, pectin methylesterification and methanol release in defense against pathogens should be described a little more thoroughly. For references see papers of these authors Bethke, Lionetti, Dorokhov.

2) The sentence on page 5 lane 106 suggests that the AA is expected to shrink during development ... review

3) Should figures 2 in the abscissa axis be seconds or minutes?

4) The statistical treatment of the data is not correctly presented. The histograms are not accompanied by any statistical sign (letters for ANOVA, asterisks, etc.). It is also unclear how many repetitions have been made. Every figure must have adequate references in this regard.

5) Figure 6 is more to review. It must be moved to supplementary materials

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

Reviewer 1

Comment 1: I very much enjoyed this manuscript and have an unusual recommendation for the authors. I found the Intro and Disc sections well written but somewhat telegraphic. I'm concerned that the significance of the realists may not come across to the general reader. I encourage the authors to consider expanding these sections to discuss the importance of their work at greater length.

Response 1: We have included more detail on the role of pectin methylesterases and methanol in plant pathogen response, as suggested by Reviewer 2. We have also expanded the introduction and discussion to emphasize the importance of this work. This includes statements that highlight the broader importance of this work in terms of plant responses to abiotic and biotic stresses:

Line 64: “The pattern and degree of pectin methylation also impacts plant susceptibility to microbial infection [19], for instance wheat cultivars with more blockwise distribution of methyl esters were more susceptible to fungal infection than cultivars with more random methylation patterns [20]. Therefore, changes in esterification of cell walls and associated transport and metabolism of the released methanol and acetic acid could provide a rapid mechanism for plants to respond to abiotic and biotic stress.”

Line 73: “MeOH production in plants is largely attributed to changes in chemical and physical cell wall properties associated with the hydrolysis of methyl esters of cell wall carbohydrates like pectin [11,27–29]. However, this assertion lacks experimental evidence, which we aim to address in the present study.”

Line 101: “Therefore, it is vital to quantify the relationships between cell wall esters and foliar meOH and AA emissions to evaluate the hypothesis that emissions derive from cell wall de-esterification and to understand their physiological and biochemical roles during plant growth and development, adaptation to abiotic and biotic stress, mortality, and biomass decomposition.”

Line 396: “Therefore, in situ monitoring of atmospheric emissions of meOH and AA from terrestrial ecosystems could help improve predictions of both tree growth and mortality mechanisms and their sensitivities to environmental change.”

Comment 2: Also, I did not see the data link that, I believe, PLOS One requires. If I missed it, I apologize. If it's not yet in the ms., it should be added.

Response 2: We now include a link to download the data within the supporting information section:

Line 585: “Supporting material consisting of the raw experimental data files collected and analyzed in this study are available in electronic form free of charge: accessed through Mendeley Data (http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/7bdwbwy6wn.1). The supplementary data (Size: 169 MB) includes raw methanol and acetic acid emission data obtained from the PTR-MS and online TD-GC-MS as well as raw colorimetric assay data for leaf bulk methyl and O-acetyl ester content organized as follows:

Volatile emission folder:

• Real-time time meOH and AA emission data during leaf desiccation experiments (PTR-MS)

• Near real-time time meOH and AA emission data during leaf desiccation experiments (online GC-MS)

Cell wall esterification folder:

• Raw absorbance data and derived total methyl ester content of AIR samples (methyl ester assays)

• Raw absorbance data and derived total acetate ester content of AIR samples (acetate ester assays)

• Derived and compiled methyl and acetate ester content of AIR samples”

Reviewer 2

Comment 1: The manuscript “Cell wall O-acetyl and methyl esterification patterns of leaves reflected in atmospheric emission signatures of acetic acid and methanol” regards to the quantification of total meOH and AA emissions in Populus trichocarpa desiccated leaves at different developmental stages were taking into account the cell wall acetylation and methylation content highlighting the quantification of AA/meOH emission ratios as a potential tool for rapid phenotype screening of structural carbohydrate esterification. I consider the manuscript very interesting and topical in the field of plant physiography and biofuels. Developing a method based on two experimental approaches, able to dynamically quantify acetic acid simultaneously with methanol is very innovative. I find the presentation of the work quite good and I don't find too many problems in the language. However, there are some aspects that need to be reviewed before the work can be presentable.

Response 1: We greatly appreciate reviewer 2 for the review and support of our innovative approaches to study cell wall acetylation and methylation through simultaneous quantification of leaf cell wall esterification and atmospheric AA/meOH emission ratios.

Comment 2: The introduction should be reviewed trying to replace some slightly dated references (Micheli et al etc). The role of PME, pectin methylesterification and methanol release in defense against pathogens should be described a little more thoroughly. For references see papers of these authors Bethke, Lionetti, Dorokhov.

Response 2: We have updated some references in the introduction; replacing Micheli et al (2001) with Wormit et al, International Journal of Molecular Sciences (2018), Dorokhov et al, Frontiers in Plant Science (2018) and Saffer, Journal of Integrative Plant Biology (2018) (ref numbers 30, 32, 33). We have also included more detailed explanations of pectin methylation and methanol release in relation to pathogen defense (Line 64; and Line 87), including references (ref numbers 19, 20, 37: Lionetti et al, Journal of Plant Physiology (2012), Weitholter et al, Molecular Plant Microbe Interactions (2003), Dorokhov et al, PLOS Pathology (2012).

Comment 3: The sentence on page 5 lane 106 suggests that the AA is expected to shrink during development ... review

Response 3: We have included some further clarification and references in the sentence to explain why we suggest that AA emissions are hypothesized to decrease with increasing leaf age.

Line 123: “Given previous observations of decreasing foliar meOH emissions with leaf age [34], and the de-esterification of cell wall esters throughout plant development [48,49] we hypothesize that similar phenological pattern can be observed for AA emissions.”

Comment 4: Should figures 2 in the abscissa axis be seconds or minutes?

Response 4: The abscissa axis is in seconds.

Comment 5: The statistical treatment of the data is not correctly presented. The histograms are not accompanied by any statistical sign (letters for ANOVA, asterisks, etc.). It is also unclear how many repetitions have been made. Every figure must have adequate references in this regard.

Response 5: We have updated the figures to include statistical signs where appropriate (figures 3 and 5). The figure legends also contain a statement “n=7” indicating the number of replicates that were included in each figure and statistical test.

Comment 6: Figure 6 is more to review. It must be moved to supplementary materials

Response 6: We believe that this figure is valuable for understanding the results by an inter-disciplinary audience likely unfamiliar with the structure and esterification patterns of plant carbohydrates, therefore we believe it is justified to leave this figure within the main article.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers_22Feb2020.docx
Decision Letter - Federico Brilli, Editor

Cell wall O-acetyl and methyl esterification patterns of leaves reflected in atmospheric emission signatures of acetic acid and methanol

PONE-D-19-34824R1

Dear Dr. Dewhirst,

I am pleased to inform you that your revised manuscript has successfully addressed the reviewers' comments and it will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Federico Brilli, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Federico Brilli, Editor

PONE-D-19-34824R1

Cell wall O-acetyl and methyl esterification patterns of leaves reflected in atmospheric emission signatures of acetic acid and methanol

Dear Dr. Dewhirst:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Federico Brilli

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .