Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 25, 2022

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Tzen-Yuh Chiang, Editor

PONE-D-22-26734

Agro-morphological variability, population structure, and genetic diversity in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jayaswal,

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 Jan 07 2023 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,

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

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. 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.

3. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

 In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

4. 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.

5. 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. 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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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: Dear Editor

I have gone through paper entitled “Agro-morphological variability, population structure, and genetic diversity in oat germplasm with special emphasis on food and feed”.

Although, the several studies have been published on the same topic, nothing new in this paper. However, the paper is generally well organized, and the introduction gave a literature review of related topics, and summarized the methods proposed in this paper. In order to make the paper easy to understand, appropriate figures and tables were also given. Therefore, I think that the paper could be published in the Journal with some modifications.

Here my comments and suggestions:

• Still some grammatical errors are present, that should be removed before publication.

• Title should be more appropriate

• Key words are not appropriate

• Write full forms of all abbreviations at least once.

• Sampling and data recording is clear and significant.

• All Figures are poor and not clear, should be replace with clear and readable images.

• Also check all references in the text and reference list carefully some are missing from the list or not cited in the text.

• Most importantly, the discussion section needs to be strengthened to highlight the importance of the work.

For further justification of the study, kindly incorporate the below current review, please.

Al-Yasari MNH (2022). Potassium and nano-copper fertilization effects on morphological and production traits of oat (Avena sativa L.). SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 54(3): 678-685. http://doi.org/10.54910/sabrao2022.54.3.20.

Abdel-Lateif KS, Hewedy OA (2018). Genetic diversity among Egyptian wheat cultivars using SCoT and ISSR markers. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 50: 36–45.

Qulmamatova DE, Baboev SK, Buronov AK (2022). Genetic variability and inheritance pattern of yield components through diallel analysis in spring wheat. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 54(1): 21-29. http://doi.org/10.54910/sabrao2022.54.1.3

Helsel DG, Skrdla RK (1983). Breeding for grain yield in oats (Avena sativa L.). SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 15(2): 139-145.

Swailam MA, Mowafy SAE, El-Naggar NZA, Mansour E (2021). Agronomic responses of diverse bread wheat genotypes to phosphorus levels and nitrogen forms in a semiarid environment. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 53: 592-608. https://doi.org/10.54910/sabrao2021.53.4.4.

**********

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: PROF. DR. NAQIB Ullah KHAN

**********

[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-2226734 - Comments.doc
Revision 1

To,

The Editor

PLOS ONE

Please find enclosed our detailed responses to the reviewers’ and editor’s comments for the manuscript “Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed”. The Editor’s and reviewer’s comments were very constructive and mainly concerned (1) Format, title and pictures quality MS, (2) References and the grammar. We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript. We have dealt with all of the critical comments in full, and revised the manuscript. We hope that you agree that we have satisfactorily dealt with the reviewer’s comments in full.

Sincerely,

Deepanshu Jayaswal on behalf of all authors.

Response to Editor

Comment 1: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point rose by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

Response: The Response to Reviewers file has been attached.

Comment 2: 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'.

Response: 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes' with suggested comments has been attached.

Comment 3: An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Response: Submitted as suggested.

Response to Journal Requirements

Comment 1: Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

Response: The whole manuscript has been considered as per the journal requirement and completed as per requirement.

Comment 2: 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.

Response: The minimal data requirements have been provided in all the attached supplementary tables.

Comment 3: PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files.

Response: We would like to ask for an apology for this. The student has taken the gel images and cropped without saving the original images. Therefore, we have all the images but in cropped version. For this we are in regret and can not produce the uncropped image. Meantime we will try to recover the images from the gel doc system where the images were taken.

Comment 4: Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly.

Response: Legends captions for all the figures and tables are given after references.

Comment 5: 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.

Response: We have gone through the MS and checked for all references.

Response to Reviewers

Comment 1: Still some grammatical errors are present, that should be removed before publication.

Response: The authentic purchased software was used to rectify the grammatical mistekes.

Comment 1: Title should be more appropriate

Response: As the term diversity itself includes population structure analysis therefore, title has been modified to make it bit short. Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

Comment 2: Key words are not appropriate

Response: Keywords has been replaced by those which are involved many times in the MS and represent the research work.

Comment 3: Write full forms of all abbreviations at least once.

Response: Please accept our apology for such small but key mistakes. Now, we have corrected as per suggestion.

Comment 4: Sampling and data recording is clear and significant.

Response: We are highly grateful for appreciation.

Comment 5: All Figures are poor and not clear, should be replacing with clear and readable images.

Response: The entire pictures dpi has been upgraded up to 600 dpi to enhance the visibility.

Comment 6: Also check all references in the text and reference list carefully some are missing from the list or not cited in the text.

Response: We have carefully checked the total number of references given and their citations in the MS text and rectified as per necessity.

Comment 7: Most importantly, the discussion section needs to be strengthened to highlight the importance of the work.

Response: Discussion of each finding has been explained where needed as per suggestion.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Tzen-Yuh Chiang, Editor

Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

PONE-D-22-26734R1

Dear Dr. Jayaswal,

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,

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

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

**********

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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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: Yes, and as per previous review comments, the the article is well improved, and it can be published now, please,.

**********

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: PROF. DR. NAQIB Ullah KHAN

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Tzen-Yuh Chiang, Editor

PONE-D-22-26734R1

Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

Dear Dr. Jayaswal:

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. Tzen-Yuh Chiang

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 .