PONE-D-22-22878Germination and seedling establishment for deep-flow hydroponics: The benefit of slant boardsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Langenfeld,

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 Oct 27 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,

Meenakshi Thakur, 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 

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. 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:

Dear Dr. Noah James Langenfeld,

I can now inform you that the Academic Editor has evaluated the manuscript PONE-D-22-22878: Germination and seedling establishment for deep-flow hydroponics: The benefit of slant boards. I am pleased to inform you that it has been favourably received. You are advised that the manuscript will be acceptable subject to satisfactory minor revision. The comments below should be taken into account when revising the manuscript. Along with your revised manuscript, you will need to supply a covering letter in which you list all the changes you have made to the manuscript, and in which you detail your responses to all the comments passed by the reviewer(s) and me. Should you disagree with any comment(s), please explain why.

Academic Editor’s comments: Add additional information about the following points:

1. You recommend overseeding by 100% to ensure selection for uniform roots. Give the data about germination percentage. Did any entanglement observed between the roots. If yes, how did you separate entangled roots?

2. How frequently you added the water in the exterior container so as to maintain the level about 2 cm above the bottom of the germination paper?

3. Check the format of writing the references clearly.

Reviewer 1: Authors improve a method of old publication and applied to the contemporary hydroponics. The presented ideas are simple and reasonable, and this method is useful for various researchers. I think it is acceptable for publication in PLOS ONE.

I request to add information about experimental condition as described below. I think it will be helpful for users.

1. Compared to the size of slant board, blue-colored paper seemed to be smaller, and the position of seeds is lower than the edge of paper. How long?

2. The density of seeds is important to prevent the root from entanglement with neighbor plants. Do you have data or estimation about that?

3. Describe the protocol in sufficient detail.

Reviewer Recommendation Term: Minor Revision

Reviewer 2: There are few queries and suggestions listed in the attached edited reviewer's copy.

Reviewer Recommendation Term: Minor Revision

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does the manuscript report a protocol which is of utility to the research community and adds value to the published literature?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the protocol been described in sufficient detail?

Descriptions of methods and reagents contained in the step-by-step protocol should be reported in sufficient detail for another researcher to reproduce all experiments and analyses. The protocol should describe the appropriate controls, sample sizes and replication needed to ensure that the data are robust and reproducible.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Does the protocol describe a validated method?

The manuscript must demonstrate that the protocol achieves its intended purpose: either by containing appropriate validation data, or referencing at least one original research article in which the protocol was used to generate data.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. If the manuscript contains new data, have the authors made this data 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

**********

5. Is the article 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 highlight any specific errors that need correcting in the box below.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: 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: Authors improve a method of old publication and applied to the contemporary hydroponics. The presented ideas are simple and reasonable, and this method is useful for various researchers. I think it is acceptable for publication in PLOS ONE.

I request to add information about experimental condition as described below. I think it will be helpful for users.

(1)Compared to the size of slant board, blue-colored paper seemed to be smaller, and the position of seeds is lower than the edge of paper. How long ?

(2)The density of seeds is important to prevent the root from entanglement with neighbor plants.

Do you have data or estimation about that ?

Reviewer #2: Dear Authors,

Greetings

There are few queries and suggestions listed in the attached edited reviewer's copy.

best wishes.

**********

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: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr Tanuja Rana

Assistant Professor

Deptt. Agricultural Biotechnology

College of Agriculture

CSK HPKV, Palampur 9HP)-176 061 India

**********

[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-22-22878_reviewer.doc

Germination and seedling establishment for hydroponics: The benefit of slant boards

PONE-D-22-22878R1

Dear Dr. Noah James Langenfeld,

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,

Meenakshi Thakur, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Dear Dr. Noah James Langenfeld,

I have checked your revised manuscript carefully for the incorporation of changes suggested by me and reviewers. You have made most of the changes as suggested, I am pleased to tell you that your work has now been accepted for publication in PLOS ONE.

Reviewers' comments: