Antifungal activity of volatile compounds generated by endophytic fungi Sarocladium brachiariae HND5 against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense

Yang Yang; Yipeng Chen; Jimiao Cai; Xianbao Liu; Guixiu Huang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0260747

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJuly 29, 2021
28 Sep 2021 Decision Letter - Vivek Sharma, Editor PONE-D-21-24535Antifungal activity of volatile compounds generated by endophytic fungi HND5 against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubensePLOS ONE Dear Dr. Huang, 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 Nov 12 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: https://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, Vivek Sharma, PhD 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 2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services. If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free. Upon resubmission, please provide the following: The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a supporting information file) A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new manuscript file) 3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "This study was supported in part by grants from Hainan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China, 319QN268" We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: "YY is founded by Hainan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [Grant 319QN268]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript" Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf 4. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ 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): Dear Authors, I am pleased to inform that your MS ID PONE-D-21-24535 entitled "Antifungal activity of volatile compounds generated by endophytic fungi HND5 against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense" can be accepted for publication after after point-wise corrections to the reviewers suggestions. Both the reviewers have suggested minor revision. [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 ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: N/A ****** 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 ****** 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: No 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: The authors have presented here the possibility of employing the volatile organic compounds from endophytic fungus Sarocladium brachiariae HND5 to antagonise the pathogen Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Cubense of banana plants. The proper experimental approach has been carried out to support the findings. There are few suggestions: The introduction of the manuscript can be improved and made more informative for the reader. Introduction should reflect the extent of work that is carried out. Such as there is no mention of Fusaric acid and its role in disease development in the introduction portion to reflect the need to study its production. The name of the fungus Sarocladium brachiariae has to be italicised in the manuscript. Also scientific names in some other places has to be italicised. The following lines from Introduction portion (pg 7 and 8) are repeated: This pathogen can infect banana from root and invade the xylem vessels and eventually cause a lethal wilting of the infected plants [3]. This pathogen can infect banana plants from the root and invade the xylem vessels, eventually causing lethal wilting of the infected plant2. Such repetitions of statements are in end of Discussion and Conclusion section too (pg 20 and 21): ‘VOCs it generates show promise for use as biological control agents or fumigants against FOC in agricultural production systems.’ It should be avoided. The line in the Material and Methods is a repeat from introduction: The antagonistic strain HND5, which was isolated from healthy leaf of Brachiaria brizantha, was identified as Sarocladium brachiariae. (China General Microbiology Culture Collection Center accession No. 2192) according to the LSU and ITS rDNA sequence [30, 31]. It needs to be restructured according to the Material and methods section. There are certain grammatical mistakes as hyphen has been used in between some of the words such as effec-tive, ac-id etc. in the Abstract. Reviewer #2: A quality of work has been done by authors and well written manuscript except few mistakes done. Firstly, add name of fungi in the title of manuscript instead of only writing HND5, Remove hyphen wherever not required as yellow highlighted, Write fungi name in italics, Remove repeated sentance, Write incubated/ion instead of inoculated/ion wherever required, Write "parafilm/ petri" in small letters, Write PBS, 2M4V, 34D, B-C in bracket when first appear in text in full form, There are some minor speeling errors like regent, unite which should be corrected to reagent, unit, Its better to use "C" for control instead of "CK", ****** 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: Yes: Banita Kumari Saklani Reviewer #2: Yes:** Dr, Zalak M Patel [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-21-24535 reviewed ZP.pdf https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260747.r001
Revision 1
9 Oct 2021 Author Response Dear Editor, Thank you for serving as the editor of our manuscript and managing the review process. We also acknowledge the efforts of the reviewers that you assembled and appreciate their constructive comments and suggestions to improve the quality of our manuscript. We have made the suggested corrections, which are provided in the revised manuscript and specific responses to each of the reviewer’s comments can be found below. Thank you for your further consideration of our revised manuscript. Detail response: Reviewer 1: The authors have presented here the possibility of employing the volatile organic compounds from endophytic fungus Sarocladium brachiariae HND5 to antagonise the pathogen Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Cubense of banana plants. The proper experimental approach has been carried out to support the findings. There are few suggestions: The introduction of the manuscript can be improved and made more informative for the reader. Introduction should reflect the extent of work that is carried out. Such as there is no mention of Fusaric acid and its role in disease development in the introduction portion to reflect the need to study its production. Answer: Thank you for your constructive criticism and detailed review of this manuscript. We have added description of fusaric acid in introduction portion. The name of the fungus Sarocladium brachiariae has to be italicised in the manuscript. Also scientific names in some other places has to be italicised. Answer: We have checked all thquanrough the manuscript and changed all scientific names to italic. The following lines from Introduction portion (pg 7 and 8) are repeated: This pathogen can infect banana from root and invade the xylem vessels and eventually cause a lethal wilting of the infected plants [3]. This pathogen can infect banana plants from the root and invade the xylem vessels, eventually causing lethal wilting of the infected plant2. Such repetitions of statements are in end of Discussion and Conclusion section too (pg 20 and 21): ‘VOCs it generates show promise for use as biological control agents or fumigants against FOC in agricultural production systems.’ It should be avoided. Answer: We have deleted the repeated sentences. The line in the Material and Methods is a repeat from introduction: The antagonistic strain HND5, which was isolated from healthy leaf of Brachiaria brizantha, was identified as Sarocladium brachiariae. (China General Microbiology Culture Collection Center accession No. 2192) according to the LSU and ITS rDNA sequence [30, 31]. It needs to be restructured according to the Material and methods section. Answer: This sentence has been restructured according to the Material and methods section. There are certain grammatical mistakes as hyphen has been used in between some of the words such as effec-tive, ac-id etc. in the Abstract. Answer: We have checked all through the manuscript and deleted all misused hyphens. Reviewer 2: A quality of work has been done by authors and well written manuscript except few mistakes done. Firstly, add name of fungi in the title of manuscript instead of only writing HND5, Answer: Thank you for your comments. They are very helpful for improving our manuscript. The fungi name has been added in the title of manuscript. Remove hyphen wherever not required as yellow highlighted, Answer: We have checked all through the manuscript and deleted all misused hyphens. Write fungi name in italics, Answer: We have checked all through the manuscript and changed all scientific names to italic. Remove repeated sentance, Answer: We have removed repeated sentences in the introduction part. Write incubated/ion instead of inoculated/ion wherever required, Answer: We have changed inoculated into incubated. Write "parafilm/ petri" in small letters, Answer: We have checked all through the manuscript and changed "parafilm/ petri" into small letters. Write PBS, 2M4V, 34D, B-C in bracket when first appear in text in full form, Answer: We have added full name of PBS, 2M4V, 34D, B-C in the text where first apper. There are some minor speeling errors like regent, unite which should be corrected to reagent, unit, Answer: We have checked all through the manuscript and corrected these spelling mistakes. Its better to use "C" for control instead of "CK" Answer: As many academic papers using “CK” for control, we keep “CK” in revised manuscript. Thanks for your suggestion! Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: response to reviewer.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260747.r002
26 Oct 2021 Decision Letter - Vivek Sharma, Editor PONE-D-21-24535R1Antifungal activity of volatile compounds generated by endophytic fungi Sarocladium brachiariae HND5 against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubensePLOS ONE Dear Dr. Huang, 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 Dec 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: https://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, Vivek Sharma, PhD 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): Dear Authors, I am happy to share that both the reviewers have recommended your publication with minor revision. The details comments can be found in the reviewers section. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: [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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260747.r003
Revision 2
8 Nov 2021 Author Response Dear Editor, Thank you for serving as the editor of our manuscript and managing the review process. We also acknowledge the efforts of the reviewers that you assembled and appreciate their constructive comments and suggestions to improve the quality of our manuscript. We have reviewed reference list and did not find retracted papers. Also, we have used PACE to adjust figures and uploaded adjusted figures in the revised manuscript. Thank you for your further consideration of our revised manuscript. Detail response: Reviewer 2: Title (Page 1): Full name of fungi (Sarocladium brachiariae) have been inserted. Abstract (Page 1): Misused hyphens have been removed. And fungi name have been written in italics. Introduction (Page 2): We have removed repeated sentences in the introduction part. Introduction (Page 2): We have checked and make sure is “low target specificity”. Materials and Methods (Page 4): We have changed "parafilm/ petri" into small letters and corrected “inoculate” to “incubate”. Materials and Methods (Page 5): We have changed "parafilm/ petri" into small letters and corrected “inoculate” to “incubate”. And we also written PBS in text in full form. Materials and Methods (Page 6): We have changed "parafilm/ petri" into small letters and corrected “inoculate” to “incubate”. And we also written 2M4V, 34D, B-C in text in full form. Results (Page 7): We have changed "parafilm/ petri" into small letters, corrected “inoculate” to “incubate” and removed misused hyphen. Results (Page 8): We have changed "regent" into “reagent”. Results (Page 9): We have changed "unite" into “unit” and corrected “inoculate” to “incubate”. Results (Page 11): We have removed misused hyphen. Figures: As many academic papers using “CK” for control, we keep “CK” in revised manuscript. Thanks for your suggestion! Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: renamed_5553a.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260747.r004
17 Nov 2021 Decision Letter - Vivek Sharma, Editor Antifungal activity of volatile compounds generated by endophytic fungi Sarocladium brachiariae HND5 against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense PONE-D-21-24535R2 Dear Dr. Huang, 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. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Vivek Sharma, PhD Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Dear Dr. Huang, I am please to inform that your MS has been accepted for publication in PLOS One. Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260747.r005
Formally Accepted
24 Nov 2021 Acceptance Letter - Vivek Sharma, Editor PONE-D-21-24535R2 Antifungal activity of volatile compounds generated by endophytic fungi Sarocladium brachiariae HND5 against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense Dear Dr. Huang: I'm 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 let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, 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. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Vivek Sharma Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260747.r006

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 .