PONE-D-22-04169Genetic characterization of the highlander Tibetan population from Qinghai-Tibet Plateau revealed by X Chromosomal STRsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Adnan,

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 Apr 24 2022 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,

Guanglin He

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. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: 

[We thank all volunteers who provided material and data for this project. This study was financially supported by Xiamen University postdoctoral research grant.]

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: 

 [3670]

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Please amend your list of authors on the manuscript to ensure that each author is linked to an affiliation. Authors’ affiliations should reflect the institution where the work was done (if authors moved subsequently, you can also list the new affiliation stating “current affiliation:….” as necessary).

4. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378111918310564?via%3Dihub

- https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-3-642-16483-5_3368

- https://docksci.com/ancestral-origins-and-genetic-history-of-tibetan-highlanders_5a073c2fd64ab272015c11c8.html

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed.

Additional Editor Comments:

All reviewer's suggestions were obtained and some of them supported publishing your work with major revision. The major problem is that some similar work focused on the Tibetans populations, such as Chengdu Tibetans, have been conducted. So, more deep analysis and further comprehensive should be made in the revised phase.

[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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: 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

Reviewer #3: 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: 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: X-STRs could be useful in some special kinship identification cases and tremendous contingent events. Authors have genotyped 549 unrelated highlander Tibetans (300 females and 249 males) with 12 X STRs using Investigator Argus X-12 Kit, and conducted a comprehensive data analysis and discussion. Data are useful in forensic applications.

Major comments:

Given that the same population and the same X-STR markers have been published several times (eg: citations 27, 36, 37), this manuscript do not provide any reasonable advance of knowledge. Although the author states at the end of the manuscript "We also observe some differences between Tibetans and Highlander Tibetans.", the differences between these two groups are not obvious in Results and Discussion part. Data itself are useful and manuscript is well written, transferred to later or data is more appropriate.

Minor revisions:

1.Line 201, delete “The combined power of polymorphism information content (CPIC)”.

2.Line 208, twelve X-STR loci should be changed to 12 X loci for consistency throughout the manuscript.

3.Figure 2, using “lowlander Tibetan” does not adequately represent the referenced Tibetan popultions.

Reviewer #2: The authors genotyped 549 individuals with Investigator Argus X-12 Kit. This study represents an extensive report on X chromosomal STR markers variation in the Highlander Tibetans population for forensic applications and population genetic studies. However, there are several issues to be revised before publication.

1. The results showed that Tibetan formed a cluster with the Southern Han population. The author should discuss the potential reason for this cluser.

2. The figure resolution is too low. They are need to be improved.

Reviewer #3: The author reports the allele frequencies and the forensic parameters of 12 X-STR loci in the Tibetan population from Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, and the genetic differences between the Tibetan population and the other populations. The data are novel and informative for forensic and genetic study , however, there are some issues in the manuscript.

1. In the "2.3. PCR amplification and STR typing", the samples were described to use a AGCU Database Y30 kit which might not related to the study, and there were no result or discussion on this kit.

2. Specific sampling location should be provided .

3.For the statistical work, Fisher exact test for population differentiation per locus between allele frequencies of male and female samples should be provided.

4. The combined discrimination of males (PDm) and females (PDf) should also be mentioned in abstract.

5. The full name should be given when the abbreviation appears for the first time, and the abbreviation should be written when it reappears later. There are many nonstandard descriptions in the text. For example ,12 X-STR， XSTR，and twelve X-STR had been used for the same subject.

6.Some data were not accurately described. For example, the genetic distance described at line 274 is 0.01523, but the specific number in schedule 7 is 0.015239487353135352, which should be recorded as 0.01524. All the data should be checked carefully.

7. The aim of this is to reveal genetic structure of specific population. The brand of the manufacturers had been mentioned too much in the background, materials and methods, results and discussion.

8. In the discussion part, findings and significant results of this study hadn't been discussed clearly .

**********

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

[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.

Dear Authors,

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,

Guanglin He

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: