Peer Review History

Original SubmissionDecember 18, 2023
Decision Letter - Guanfu Fu, Editor

PONE-D-23-42629Analyzing Cold Hardiness (Based on DTA) of One-Year-Old Branches of PeachesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Li,

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 28 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,

Guanfu Fu, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

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 Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

3. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement: 

This work was supported by Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops (Germplasm Resources Utilization), Ministry of Agriculture,P.R.China (No. NYZS202305) and Technology Innovation Special Project of Hebei Academy (No. 2022KJCXZX-CGS-6), Key R&D Projects of Hebei Province (No. 21326310D), Modern Agricultural Industrial Technology System of Hebei Province (No. HBCT2023130205) and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (No. CARS-30-Z-02).

Please provide an amended statement that declares all the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now.  Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement. 

Please include your amended Funding Statement within 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: 

This work was supported by Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops (Germplasm Resources Utilization), Ministry of Agriculture,P.R.China (No. NYZS202305) and Technology Innovation Special Project of Hebei Academy (No. 2022KJCXZX-CGS-6), Key R&D Projects of Hebei Province (No. 21326310D), Modern Agricultural Industrial Technology System of Hebei Province (No. HBCT2023130205) and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (No. CARS-30-Z-02).

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 work was supported by Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops (Germplasm Resources Utilization), Ministry of Agriculture,P.R.China (No. NYZS202305) and Technology Innovation Special Project of Hebei Academy (No. 2022KJCXZX-CGS-6), Key R&D Projects of Hebei Province (No. 21326310D), Modern Agricultural Industrial Technology System of Hebei Province (No. HBCT2023130205) and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (No. CARS-30-Z-02).

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.

6. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.

7. 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

[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: 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

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: Yes

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: Comments

The authors selected Wangjiazhuangmaotao No.2, Zhongnongjinhui, and Chunmei as three representative varieties with strong, moderate, and weak cold hardiness ranks to determine EI and BR. However, Table 3 showed that Zhongnongjinhui and Chunmei are both medium cold-hardiness (MH) variety. In the subsequent results, there was a difference in data of BR between Zhongnongjinhui and Chunmei, both of which were MH variety. Does this indicat that the identification of cold hardness through LTE investment of is not as precise? Please explain in detail.

Minor points

1. Please review the manuscript for punctuation errors throughout the text, e.g. line 88 "... electrical leakage (EI)]".

2. Please review the manuscript for the consistency of font size, e.g. line 96 "A total of …", and line 164 "…hardiness…".

3. Please carefully check the reference format and ensure consistency, e.g. line 346 "Am. J. Enol. Vitic", and line 352 "Annals of Botany".

Reviewer #2: In this manuscript, the authors demonstrated the validity of LTE analysis for cold hardiness of peach branches by analyzing the exothermic behavior, brown rates, and the electrolytic leakage of one-year-old branches of sixteen peach cultivars under low temperature conditions. This work could be accepted after minor revisions. Other questions were shown below:

1. There are multiple formatting errors throughout the manuscript, such as the incorrect use of spaces in lines 34, 66, 74, 77, etc.

2. Line 80: "the LTE determination method involved cutting" should not be formatted in bold.

3. Fig 1: Graphing error, there is no point C in the diagram.

4. Line 140: “There” should be “there”.

5. Line 256: An “of” should be removed.

6. Line 260: “wiht” should be “with”.

7. Line 278: “siince” should be “since”.

**********

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

**********

[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: Review comments.docx
Revision 1

Response to the comments of the academic editor and the reviewers

Manuscript Number: PONE-D-23-42629

Manuscript Title: Analyzing Cold Hardiness (Based on DTA) of One-Year-Old Branches of Peaches

Dear Editors:

Thanks for your kind comments. We have carefully read the whole manuscript and revised it in accordance with the academic editor and the reviewers’ comments. The corrections and additions are highlighted in red color in manuscript. We list the reply as follows:

Guanfu Fu, Ph.D

Academic Editor

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

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

Reply:We have revised the manuscript according to PLOS ONE's style requirements.

2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

Reply:

No permits statement

We are a non-profit scientific research institutions and do not need to provide a permit.

3. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement:

This work was supported by Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops (Germplasm Resources Utilization), Ministry of Agriculture,P.R.China (No. NYZS202305) and Technology Innovation Special Project of Hebei Academy (No. 2022KJCXZX-CGS-6), Key R&D Projects of Hebei Province (No. 21326310D), Modern Agricultural Industrial Technology System of Hebei Province (No. HBCT2023130205) and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (No. CARS-30-Z-02).

Please provide an amended statement that declares all the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now. Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement.

Please include your amended Funding Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Reply:We have submitted our amended Funding Statement in cover letter.

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

This work was supported by Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops (Germplasm Resources Utilization), Ministry of Agriculture,P.R.China (No. NYZS202305) and Technology Innovation Special Project of Hebei Academy (No. 2022KJCXZX-CGS-6), Key R&D Projects of Hebei Province (No. 21326310D), Modern Agricultural Industrial Technology System of Hebei Province (No. HBCT2023130205) and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (No. CARS-30-Z-02).

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 work was supported by Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops (Germplasm Resources Utilization), Ministry of Agriculture,P.R.China (No. NYZS202305) and Technology Innovation Special Project of Hebei Academy (No. 2022KJCXZX-CGS-6), Key R&D Projects of Hebei Province (No. 21326310D), Modern Agricultural Industrial Technology System of Hebei Province (No. HBCT2023130205) and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (No. CARS-30-Z-02).

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

Reply:We have deleted and changed the declaration in the Acknowledgments Section of my manuscript.

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.

Reply:Our submission have contained all raw data required to replicate the results of study.

6. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.

Reply:I accept your suggestion that all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance.

7. 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

Reply:I have ensured that I have an ORCID iD.

Reviewer #1:

1. The authors selected Wangjiazhuangmaotao No.2, Zhongnongjinhui, and Chunmei as three representative varieties with strong, moderate, and weak cold hardiness ranks to determine EI and BR. However, Table 3 showed that Zhongnongjinhui and Chunmei are both medium cold-hardiness (MH) variety. In the subsequent results, there was a difference in data of BR between Zhongnongjinhui and Chunmei, both of which were MH variety. Does this indicat that the identification of cold hardness through LTE investment of is not as precise? Please explain in detail.

Reply:The definition of medium cold-hardiness (MH) variety is relatively broad, which can also be divided into three levels: high, medium, and low, so there may be differences in the EI and BR of Zhongnongjinhui and Chunmei.

2. Minor points:Please review the manuscript for punctuation errors throughout the text, e.g. line 88 "... electrical leakage (EI)]".

Reply:We have checked and corrected the the manuscript for punctuation.

We have corrected line 88 "... electrical leakage (EI)]".

3. Minor points:Please review the manuscript for the consistency of font size, e.g. line 96 "A total of …", and line 164 "…hardiness…".

Reply:We have reviewed and corrected the manuscript for the consistency of font size.

4. Minor points:Please carefully check the reference format and ensure consistency, e.g. line 346 "Am. J. Enol. Vitic", and line 352 "Annals of Botany".

Reply:We have checked and corrected the reference format and ensure consistency,e.g. line 346 "Am. J. Enol. Vitic", and line 352 "Annals of Botany", as well as others.

Reviewer #2:

1. There are multiple formatting errors throughout the manuscript, such as the incorrect use of spaces in lines 34, 66, 74, 77, etc.

Reply:We have checked and corrected formatting errors formatting errors, such as the incorrect use of spaces in lines 34, 66, 74, 77, etc.

2. Line 80: "the LTE determination method involved cutting" should not be formatted in bold.

Reply:We have checked and corrected formatting errors formatting errors.

3.Fig 1: Graphing error, there is no point C in the diagram.

Reply:We have checked and corrected the annotation error for point C in Fig 1.

4.Line 140: “There” should be “there”.

Reply:“There” is correct writing, and we have corrected the punctuation error before it. 5. Line 256: An “of” should be removed.

Reply:We have checked and corrected the error.

5.Line 260: “wiht” should be “with”.

Reply:We have checked and corrected the error.

7. Line 278: “siince” should be “since”.

Reply:We have checked and corrected the error.

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.

Reply:Authors agrees to option to publish the peer review history.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Guanfu Fu, Editor

PONE-D-23-42629R1Analyzing Cold Hardiness (Based on DTA) of One-Year-Old Branches of PeachesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tian,

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 Jul 12 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,

Guanfu Fu, Ph.D

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:

According to the comments, many misspellings were still found in the manuscript. it could be accepted after careful checking.

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

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: 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 #3: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #3: N/A

**********

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 #3: (No Response)

**********

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: No

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: The revised manuscript provided by Li et al. has revised and respond correctly to comments from both former reviewers.

However, there is one more comment need to be amended. I found that the authors mentioned “Huangjinmi No.1” in the Abstract section of the manuscript, but I cannot find any related information about “Huangjinmi No.1” in the other sections of the manuscript. So please double check whether this is a typo of “Golden honey No. 1” (as I have read it in the Results section but not mentioned in the Abstract section) and amend the fault. I suggest the manuscript could be accepted after this fault being fixed.

**********

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 #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.

Revision 2

Date: June 22, 2024

Dear Editors:

Thank you for your letter and for the academic editor and the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript “Analyzing Cold Hardiness (Based on DTA) of One-Year-Old Branches of Peaches”. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval.

Academic Editor

Journal Requirements:

Q: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.

A:We have carefully checked the reference list to ensure it is complete and correct.

Responses to Editor:

Reviewers' comments:

Responses to Reviewers:I will no longer explain the affirmative response given by the reviewers, but I will provide my answers to the No and No responses given by the reviewers.

Q: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: No

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

A:We have found an English native speaker with a research background to review our manuscript during revision. And if you think there is any problem, you can raise it at any time. we will look for professional organizations to improve the language

Q: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: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: The revised manuscript provided by Li et al. has revised and respond correctly to comments from both former reviewers.

However, there is one more comment need to be amended. I found that the authors mentioned “Huangjinmi No.1” in the Abstract section of the manuscript, but I cannot find any related information about “Huangjinmi No.1” in the other sections of the manuscript. So please double check whether this is a typo of “Golden honey No. 1” (as I have read it in the Results section but not mentioned in the Abstract section) and amend the fault. I suggest the manuscript could be accepted after this fault being fixed.

A:About Golden honey No. 1 and Huangjinmi No.1 problem mentioned by the third reviewer, we have altered to use a Golden honey No. 1. (see abstract)

Q: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 <a href="mailto:figures@plos.org">figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

A:We have uploaded figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Guanfu Fu, Editor

Analyzing Cold Hardiness (Based on DTA) of One-Year-Old Branches of Peaches

PONE-D-23-42629R2

Dear Dr. Qihang Tian

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,

Guanfu Fu, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Guanfu Fu, Editor

PONE-D-23-42629R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tian,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, 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 customercare@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

prof. Guanfu Fu

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 .