PONE-D-23-39382Green synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticles and its efficacy against Rhizoctonia solani, a fungus causing sheath blight disease in ricePLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Latif,

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 Mar 14 2024 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,

Marwa Fayed

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 financial disclosure: 

"This experiment was conducted under the project titled “Sustainable management of blast, sheath blight and bacterial blight diseases of rice through Nanoparticles (Project ID:TF 71-C/20) funded by Krishi Gobeshona Foundation (KGF), Ministry of Agriculture, Bangladesh."

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: ""The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."" 

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. 

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

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

"Authors are grateful to authority of Plant Pathology Division of Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) and Krishi Gobesona Foundation to provide funding and research facilities to conduct this experiment."

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: 

"This experiment was conducted under the project titled “Sustainable management of blast, sheath blight and bacterial blight diseases of rice through Nanoparticles (Project ID:TF 71-C/20) funded by Krishi Gobeshona Foundation (KGF), Ministry of Agriculture, Bangladesh."

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

5. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

Additional Editor Comments:

Kindly revise your manuscript extensively according to the attached reviewers' comments.

Add updated references and ensure that they follow the journal's guidelines.

Extensive language and grammar revision is required.

[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: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: No

**********

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

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: No

**********

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: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: No

**********

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: No

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: 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: The manuscript entitled "Green synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticles and its efficacy against Rhizoctonia solani, a fungus causing sheath blight disease in rice" has been reviewed.

The overall manuscript is good. However, before publishing it, there are several issues should be resolved. There are several minor grammatical errors, typo errors have been identified.

The abstract need some modification,.

Introduction is ok.

In the material and methods section, some of the methodology needs detailed description.

For better readership and improvement in the manuscript, author can read the following literature and cite them at appropriate places:

- Phytogenically Synthesized Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles (ZnO-NPs) Potentially Inhibit the Bacterial Pathogens: In Vitro Studies

- Nano-pesticidal potential of Cassia fistula (L.) leaf synthesized silver nanoparticles (Ag@CfL-NPs): Deciphering the phytopathogenic inhibition and growth augmentation in Solanum lycopersicum (L.)

- Green Synthesized Silver Nanoparticles Mitigate Biotic Stress Induced by Meloidogyne incognita in Trachyspermum ammi (L.) by Improving Growth, Biochemical, and Antioxidant Enzyme Activities

Reviewer #2: The article lacks the innovation, since similar work has been published before, please follow this link: https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-nbt.2015.0121

The English language of the manuscript is very poor. It must be improved (please see carefully the attached revised version). The manuscript is difficult to publish before the editing of English language.

The Abstract

The abstract is too long; it should be shortened and the abbreviations should not mention in the abstract. For example, the genera of organisms should be written in full.

AgNO3 correct to AgNO3 throughout the manuscript.

In Materials and Methods:

The paragraph 2.2. is confusing and must be modified for understanding.

The authors did not explain the characteristics of soil used in pot experiment.

The paragraph 2.6. is confusing and must be modified for understanding.

Line 303: What are the authors means by the 3-day old mycelial blocks R. solani were placed in the center of the plants?

Dholkolimi or dholkolimi, please unify throughout the manuscript.

Amister or amister,

In vivo or in vitro should be written in italic.

The color or colour, please unify throughout the manuscript.

Min. or minutes, please unify throughout the manuscript.

The author must follow the style of the journal during writing particularly the references list.

Reviewer #3: Green synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticles and its efficacy against

Rhizoctonia solani, a fungus causing sheath blight disease in rice in this titled paper author expressed the viws nicely some observatons are

1. Figure 2 a make spetra in a cristanality form like 100 , 101 201 etc and have compared the data with JCPD number

2. FTIR graph overlaying with standard silve nitrate graph and check it starts from higher range to lower 4000 to 600

3. XRD shows it is not in a pure form it contains C, O Cl also and explain about atoms percentage in grpah and Ag is less

4. for all UV graphs there is a peak in UV range what it indiactes, and why u have taken control as pH 5.5

5. References are not in same style

6. have you taken any standard pesticide as control for comparision

Reviewer #4: A good manuscript with sound information. However, some improvement is needed before it gets published. The following are the recommendations:

1. Please signify the novelty of the work. Developing AgNPs via plant sources and observing their anti-microbial activity is not new. Please indicate the novelty of your work given plant used, process used, or fungi used in the exp.

2. Please mention the solution used to increase the pH of plant extract for developing AgNPs.

3. Why pH 7 and 8 are missing? Do you have any specific reason behind this?

4. FTIR data of plant extract is missing, if possible please add the same.

5. Please improve the discussion part.

Reviewer #5: The manuscript entitled:" Green synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticles and its efficacy against Rhizoctonia solani, a fungus causing sheath blight disease in rice" has been reviewed. In my opinion, it s very interesting and falls really well with the scope of the journal. So I recommend it to be accepted.

Kind regards

Reviewer #6: The manuscript is technically week ad needs major improvements.

The figures are very poorly taken, not appropriate and unable to read. there are many statistical errors and typo mistakes. Whole manuscripts is needed to be rewrite.

**********

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: Mohammad Shahid

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: No

Reviewer #5: Yes: Sonia Aghighi

Reviewer #6: 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-23-39382_reviewer.pdf

Attachment

Submitted filename: COMMENTS.docx

Green synthesis and characterization of silver nanoparticles and its efficacy against Rhizoctonia solani, a fungus causing sheath blight disease in rice

PONE-D-23-39382R1

Dear Dr. Abdul Latif,

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Marwa Fayed

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: 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: Partly

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: 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 #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 #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 authors have improved the manuscript as suggested by the reviewer. Now the manuscript sounds good. It can be published in its current form.

Reviewer #2: I think the authors did all requested comments

I have no research ethics

I have no publications ethics

Reviewer #4: (No Response)

**********

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: Mohammad Shahid

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #4: Yes: Dr. Deepak Gola

**********