PONE-D-21-06451

Characterization of Vascular Plant One-Zinc Finger in Soybean (Glycine max and Glycine soja) and their Expression Analyses Under Drought Condition

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fiaz,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 15 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're 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.

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). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Umair Ashraf

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

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

1. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

3. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

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: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: No

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: 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

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: No

**********

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: Abstract

1. Line 27-28. “and response against”, replace with under

2. Line 29. “less data”, replace with fewer information

3. Line 31. “Into” replace with in

4. Few sentences require author attention for clarity of message for readership community.

5. Kindly rephrase the abstract make it more concise.

Keywords

Kindly revise keywords, add keywords other than in title.

Introduction

Kindly remove the short paragraphing. The introduction part better consist of 3 to 4 paragraphs.

1. Line 48. “genetic bottlenecking”, replace with genetic bottleneck

2. Line 48-50. “G. soja can provide a promising source of new genes for G. max breeding required to respond to population urge is face of climatic changes”. Kindly rephrase the sentence for better understanding.

3. Line 50. “The genomes of G. max [2] and G. soja [3]” , place citations at proper place.

4. Line 52-54. Rephrase the sentence structure for better understanding the actual meanings.

5. Line 58. “Stress factor”, kindly elaborate which stress factor.

6. Line 63. “AVP1”, recheck the names of gene must be Italic.

7. Line 74. “thaliana but improved resistance to fungal pathogen”, kindly cite appropriate citation.

8. Line 74. “voz1voz2 (dual mutants)” must be voz1/voz2

9. Line 76. “DREB2A” make it Italic.

10. Line 77-78. “According to published reports”, cite the related articles.

11. Line 86, “Beside this”, replace with moreover

Materials and Methods

1. Line 134. “soybean plants grown under field conditions”, mention the location of field trail.

Results

1. Line 152-155. Rephrase sentence.

2. Line 165. “cultivated and wild soybean”, mention the G. max and G. soja.

3. There are few sentences which need rephrasing, carefully gone through the result section and make necessary modification.

Discussion

The discussion part is weak as less similar work has been cited by the authors. The above cited references have been referred in discussion part which need to revisit by authors to make discussion more comprehensive.

The authors needs to add the conclusion part to highlight the important outcome of present results.

References

Carefully follow the journal’s reference format.

Figures

Figure 1. Italic the scientific names.

Figure 2. Italic the gene names

Reviewer #2: The present article presented interesting information on VOZ transcription factors involved in drought stress tolerance. After carefully going through the article, I found that it can be accepted for possible publication. However, the authors must address the below-mentioned minor issues before official acceptance.

1. Please add a separate abbreviations list.

2. Line 25-26. “To attain sustainable production ……… for the genetic improvement”. Rephrase the following sentence.

3. Line 29. “At present, less data is available regarding GmVOZs and GsVOZs”. Rephrase the sentence.

4. Line 35. “G. max and G. soja”, please write full name on the first appearance, later utilize the abbreviated form throughout the manuscript.

5. Line 40. Add some more outcomes of the present investigation to strengthen the conclusion.

6. Line 48-50. “G. soja can provide a ….. face of climatic changes”. Rephrase the sentence.

7. Line 79. Provide a suitable reference.

8. Line 82. Replace “juvenile” with foundation

9. The present study's objectives are not clear, so there is a need to strengthen the objective part.

10. Gene names should be in Italic throughout the manuscript.

11. Line 159. Replace “Not too many” with few.

12. Avoid the repetition of information throughout the result section.

13. The discussion part is weak and needs improvement; cite some latest references.

14. Provide a separate conclusion section.

Decision

Accept with minor revision.

Reviewer #3: It is an interesting study. In general, the paper is well written and structured. However, in my opinion the paper has some shortcomings in regards to some text. I also suggested to cite more relevant. Given these shortcomings the manuscript requires minor revisions.

Reviewer #4: The manuscript presents an interesting study. However, in my opinion there are few shortcomings in the compilation of text.

1- The author should consider rearrangement of the paragraphs/sentences in the introduction to make it more clear to the reader and easy to follow. This will also help to generate association between the two sections i.e. introduction and discussion

2- I suggest adding literature citation at line 77-79;

3- Lines 256-258 can better be a part of discussion to support your results.

4- The author is advised to add references of the figures and tables of their own results in the discussion section, to illustrate a clear interpretation of their own results with the previous studies. This will increase a reader's understanding of what is new and what was lacking in the previous studies.

5- Line 279-280 must be supported with references 1 and 16.

6- I suggest addition of conclusion which will bring out the importance of work as the author states that it is the first investigation of it's type. Conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented data.

6- Scale is not provided with Figure No. 2. The caption do not explain how much the image has been edited or manipulated. It do not mention the microscope used to capture it and under what conditions. A figure's caption should provide it's complete stand alone explanation.

7- Reference Number 15 is repeated again at No. 32.

8- Reference No. 1 needs recheck citation.

**********

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

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: 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.]

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 PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-21-06451_ Comments.docx

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewer Report PlosOne.docx

PONE-D-21-06451R1

Characterization of Vascular Plant One-Zinc Finger in Soybean (Glycine max and Glycine soja) and their Expression Analyses Under Drought Condition

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fiaz,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

ACADEMIC EDITOR: I inform you that although your study addresses a current topic and presents potentially publishable contents, it is still required to make some minor modifications as suggested by the reviewer in order to be approved for publication in Plos One. Please have a thorough look into the manuscript to remove typos and other grammatical mistakes.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 19 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're 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.

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). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dr. Umair Ashraf

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #4: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. 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: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. 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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

5. 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

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

6. 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: The author/s has addressed all the comments/suggestions. There are further no comments from my side for author/s.

Reviewer #2: The authors have addressed all the comments, and the manuscript has been significantly improved. I have no more comments. The current version should be accepted for publication in Plos One.

Congratulations!!

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

Reviewer #4: Dear Author

1. The conclusion paragraph needs revision e.g. rearranging sentences, use of present tense.

2. Line 357 replace "six each genes of" to "six genes each of".

**********

7. 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: Yes: Dr. Galal Bakr Anis

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: 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.]

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 PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PONE-D-21-06451R2

Characterization of Vascular Plant One-Zinc Finger in Soybean (Glycine max and Glycine soja) and their Expression Analyses Under Drought Condition

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fiaz,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

ACADEMIC EDITOR: There are still some typos and grammatical mistakes. Few examples are: Line 282: "Present yield grain trends" which should be 'grain yield' and Line 267-68: "Gene expression experiment results" should be "Results of gene expression experiment". So I recommend that author should re-check the manuscript thoroughly and should proof read from a native English speaker to improve the overall write-up. Manuscript should be free from grammatical mistakes with correct sentence formation.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 10 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're 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.

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). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Umair Ashraf

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

There are still some typos and grammatical mistakes. Few examples are: Line 282: "Present yield grain trends" which should be 'grain yield' and Line 267-68: "Gene expression experiment results" should be "Results of gene expression experiment". So I recommend that author should re-check the manuscript thoroughly and should proof read from a native English speaker to improve the overall write-up. Manuscript should be free from grammatical mistakes with correct sentence formation.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

[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.]

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 PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Characterization of Vascular Plant One-Zinc Finger in Soybean (Glycine max and Glycine soja) and their Expression Analyses Under Drought Condition

PONE-D-21-06451R3

Dear Dr. Fiaz,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. 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 help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- 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.

Kind regards,

Umair Ashraf

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: