Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMay 31, 2024
Decision Letter - Rajappa Janyanaik Joga, Editor

PONE-D-24-22074Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq) of tea plant (Camellia sinensis) in Sichuan province, China, provides insights into free amino acid and polyphenol contents of teaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Wang,

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 Aug 17 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,

Rajappa Janyanaik Joga, PhD

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 Tea varieties breeding and promotion project of Sichuan (sccxtd-2023-10), Natural science Foundation of Sichuan (2023NSFSC0163), Financial independent project of Sichuan (2022ZZCX055), “The 14th Five-Year Plan” tea tree breeding project of Sichuan (2021YFYZ0025), “1 + 9” scientific and technological research project of Sichuan Academy of Agricultural Sciences.

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 uploading your study's underlying data set. Unfortunately, the repository you have noted in your Data Availability statement does not qualify as an acceptable data repository according to PLOS's standards.

At this time, please upload the minimal data set necessary to replicate your study's findings to a stable, public repository (such as figshare or Dryad) and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. For a list of recommended repositories and additional information on PLOS standards for data deposition, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

5. 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

6. We note that Figure 1A in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1A to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.  

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[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: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: I Don't Know

**********

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

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: 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: The MS reported RAD-seq of tea plant in Sichuan province, China, providing insights into free amino acid and polyphenol contents of tea. It is acceptable for publication in PLoS One after some revisions.

1.Authoritative permission is requested to use the map in the publication.

2.The FAA content was approximately 3 µg/mL and the TP content was approximately 17 µg/mL. Please check the unit carefully, they should be 30 and 170 µg/mL, respectively. TP is a mixture of phenolic substance, it is better to analyze the main catechins. The GWAS results will be more specific and useful.

3.All tea tree to be tea plant. And tea cultivar is better than tea variety. The 139 accession is recommended to list as Supporting information.

Reviewer #2: This study on the genetic basis of the cumulation of FAAs and TP was very significant. The experiment design was reasonable and the research method was advanced too, so the conclusion was reliable.

However the following questions needs further solving.

1. In the section materials and methods, the data analysis methods of the contents of FAAs and TP needs adding. The statistical methods include ANOVA and multiple comparisons, so the section results of the contents of FAAs and Tp needs modifing accordingly.

2. It had better to transfer the figure 1A to the section materials and methods.

3. Add the important pathways of the FAAs metabolism and TP metabolism.

Reviewer #3: In general term, the manuscript titled “Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq) of tea plant (Camellia sinensis) in Sichuan province, China, provides insights into free amino acid and polyphenol contents of tea” represent interesting topic and might be of interest for the broader readers of Plos One.

The authors collected 139 tea varieties from Sichuan, China and analyzed their free amino acids (FAAs) and tea polyphenols (TPs) contents and identified their variant loci using RAD. The results hold interesting data for molecular breeders in tracing their practices to the accumulated levels pf FAAs and TPs. However, the demonstration of the results is below average, and the discussion is generally lacking and superficial. Further, the quality of figures is too low, and the content is rarely readable. I would recommend accept their work after addressing these issues.

**********

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: Yes: Kaibing Zhou

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 1

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your feedback and the insightful comments from the reviewers regarding our manuscript. These comments have proven to be valuable in revising and enhancing our MS, as well as providing significant guidance for our research. We have thoroughly analyzed the comments and made appropriate revisions. Now, we resubmit our revised MS, hoping that they will be satisfactory. If you have any queries, please don’t hesitate to contact me at the address below. Moreover, we would like to present the key revisions made in the paper along with our responses to the reviewers' comments listed below, and all revisions showed in tracked MS.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Xiaoping Wang

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

A: we have changed MS 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.

A: This study is not engaged in the study of the genetic diversity of the tea tree, there are no ethical issues involved and no authorization is required.

3. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement:

This work was supported by Tea varieties breeding and promotion project of Sichuan (sccxtd-2023-10), Natural science Foundation of Sichuan (2023NSFSC0163), Financial independent project of Sichuan (2022ZZCX055), “The 14th Five-Year Plan” tea tree breeding project of Sichuan (2021YFYZ0025), “1 + 9” scientific and technological research project of Sichuan Academy of Agricultural Sciences.

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.

A: Financial Disclosure Statement are revised and submitted as an additional file.

4. Thank you for uploading your study's underlying data set. Unfortunately, the repository you have noted in your Data Availability statement does not qualify as an acceptable data repository according to PLOS's standards.

At this time, please upload the minimal data set necessary to replicate your study's findings to a stable, public repository (such as figshare or Dryad) and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. For a list of recommended repositories and additional information on PLOS standards for data deposition, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

A: we have changed the accession to “The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) repository (accession no. SRR28840134-SRR28840272).

5. 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

A: we have added ORCID iD of corresponding author (0009-0003-2006-8467).

6. We note that Figure 1A in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

A: Thanks for your comments. We removed Figure 1A due to the inability to obtain authorization for the map, which has no impact on the reader's understanding of the main content of the paper.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: The MS reported RAD-seq of tea plant in Sichuan province, China, providing insights into free amino acid and polyphenol contents of tea. It is acceptable for publication in PLoS One after some revisions.

1. Authoritative permission is requested to use the map in the publication.

A: Thanks for your comments. We removed Figure 1A due to the inability to obtain authorization for the map, which has no impact on the reader's understanding of the main content of the paper.

2.The FAA content was approximately 3 µg/mL and the TP content was approximately 17 µg/mL. Please check the unit carefully, they should be 30 and 170 µg/mL, respectively. TP is a mixture of phenolic substance, it is better to analyze the main catechins. The GWAS results will be more specific and useful.

A: Thanks for your comments. After careful checking, it was found that the wrong unit was used and the correct unit should be the ratio of the score to the mass of the dry matter.

We have changed “µg/mL” to “%”.

3.All tea tree to be tea plant. And tea cultivar is better than tea variety. The 139 accession is recommended to list as Supporting information.

A: Thanks. we changed ‘tea tree’ to ‘tea plant’, and ‘tea varieties’ to ‘tea cultivars’. The 139 accessions information are list in S1Table. And change the original S1-S5 Table to S2-S6 Table in turn.

Reviewer #2: This study on the genetic basis of the cumulation of FAAs and TP was very significant. The experiment design was reasonable and the research method was advanced too, so the conclusion was reliable.

However the following questions needs further solving.

1. In the section materials and methods, the data analysis methods of the contents of FAAs and TP needs adding. The statistical methods include ANOVA and multiple comparisons, so the section results of the contents of FAAs and Tp needs modifing accordingly.

A: Thanks. in this study, we mainly the normal distribution of FAAs and TP contents. We added the methods “Normal distribution analysis was performed; histogram and violin plot were drawn by GraphPad Prism 9.5.0.

2. It had better to transfer the figure 1A to the section materials and methods.

A: Thanks. We removed Figure 1A due to the inability to obtain authorization for the map, which has no impact on the reader's understanding of the main content of the paper.

3. Add the important pathways of the FAAs metabolism and TP metabolism.

A: Thanks for your suggestion. Given that "FAAs" and "TPs" are used as general terms to refer to a large group of metabolites, respectively. The metabolic pathways of each metabolite may differ, and this information is not currently available.

Reviewer #3: In general term, the manuscript titled “Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq) of tea plant (Camellia sinensis) in Sichuan province, China, provides insights into free amino acid and polyphenol contents of tea” represent interesting topic and might be of interest for the broader readers of Plos One.

The authors collected 139 tea varieties from Sichuan, China and analyzed their free amino acids (FAAs) and tea polyphenols (TPs) contents and identified their variant loci using RAD. The results hold interesting data for molecular breeders in tracing their practices to the accumulated levels pf FAAs and TPs. However, the demonstration of the results is below average, and the discussion is generally lacking and superficial. Further, the quality of figures is too low, and the content is rarely readable. I would recommend accept their work after addressing these issues.

A: Thanks for your suggestion. In this study, we collected 139 accessions and analyzed the SNPs associated with FAAs and TPs as well as the genes that might be associated. The results provide some reference. Nonetheless, the results are still relatively scarce and unconvincing due to the lack of further research and proof of the functions of the candidate genes. In addition, although we obtained the cultivar name and geographic information of the collected tea varieties, the genetic information of the formation of these varieties is still lacking, which makes it difficult to analyze the origin and kinship of these varieties in depth. All figures in this thesis are provided as tif files at 300 ppi resolution, and we can also provide them in PDF format if higher quality images are required. We have further revised the paper based on the comments of reviewers #1, #2 and your comments, and hope that this version is more readable.

Others:

P2, we changed “Jiang et al. employed GWAS to identify aroma substances in 70 tea cultivars from Fujian” to “Jiang et al. employed GWAS to identify aroma substances in 70 tea cultivars from Fujian province and Liu et al. revealed the phylogenetic relationships of four typical tea landraces from Hunan province”

We added five important literature citations.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Mojtaba Kordrostami, Editor

Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq) of tea plant (Camellia sinensis) in Sichuan province, China, provides insights into free amino acid and polyphenol contents of tea

PONE-D-24-22074R1

Dear Dr. Wang,

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,

Mojtaba Kordrostami, Ph.D.

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

Reviewer #2: 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: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: 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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: 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

**********

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 R1 addressed all the concernings I raised. Please pay attention about the scientific name while proofing.

Reviewer #2: Dear authors,

This study on the genetic basis of the cumulation of FAAs and TP was very significant. The experiment design was reasonable and the research method was advanced too, so the conclusion was reliable.

Thank you for your explaination for my comments. I have no other suggestion.

**********

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: No

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Mojtaba Kordrostami, Editor

PONE-D-24-22074R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Wang,

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

Dr. Mojtaba Kordrostami

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 .