Peer Review History

Original SubmissionApril 23, 2025
Decision Letter - Uğur Cakilcioğlu, Editor

PONE-D-25-21407Chiliadenus iphionoides: From Chemical Profiling to Anticancer, Antioxidant, α-amylase, and α-glycosidase activitiesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Bsharat,

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 02 2025 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,

Uğur Cakilcioğlu, PhD

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. 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.

[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: There are many studies on the antioxidative and anticancer effects of Chiliadenus iphionoides extracts. In this manuscript, the essential oils were isolated and their chemical content was determined, and the antimicrobial, antioxidative and anticancer effects of this oil were investigated. In this respect, the originality of the study is high. The study was well planned and appropriate methods were used. Plant names should be written in italics in the References section. In Fig. 3 and 4, A and B should be separate or B should be rearranged. Fig. 5 is not of good quality, it should be redrawn and rearranged. In Figs. 6 and 7, the fonts of the x and y axes should be the same.

Reviewer #2: Dear Editor; The attached article was checked. The manuscript contains interesting information about Chiliadenus iphionoides: From Chemical Profiling to Anticancer, Antioxidant, α-amylase, and α-glycosidase activities

I think that this article is well suited to your journal.

It is generally good work. The scientific and presentation level of the manuscript is high.

The title is understandable and in line with the text. The text is written in a descriptive and understandable language. The material and method are well described and adequately detailed Discussion and conclusion are interrelated.

What is the difference between the study and existing studies?

-add to the introduction; available in different on the wild edible plant studies

https://doi.org/10.1002/ardp.202300263

https://doi.org/10.1002/ardp.202300528

https://doi.org/10.1002/ardp.202400194

https://doi.org/10.1002/efd2.70021

In ms: Write the name of the authority to the end of the plant’s name.

- http://www.theplantlist.org/

Please, read the paper and correct them all.

What is the difference between the study and existing studies?

References were cross-checked.

-The paper should be edited according to the writing rules of the journal

Original manuscript. There are, however, a few minor changes required.

**********

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.

Revision 1

Thank you for you valuable Suggestions and comments.

Response to Editor:

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

Response: Thank you for your suggestion. Done according to Journal guidelines sections are divided into Heading 1, heading 2 and heading 3 as requested and, Title, References, affiliation all have been edited according to Journal guidelines.

2. 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.

Response: Done

Response to Reviewers:

Reviewer #1: There are many studies on the antioxidative and anticancer effects of Chiliadenus iphionoides extracts. In this manuscript, the essential oils were isolated and their chemical content was determined, and the antimicrobial, antioxidative and anticancer effects of this oil were investigated. In this respect, the originality of the study is high.

Thank you for your comments and suggestions.

1. The study was well planned and appropriate methods were used. Plant names should be written in italics in the References section.

Response: Done

2. In Fig. 3 and 4, A and B should be separate or B should be rearranged.

Response: Done, in Fig. 3 and 4, A and B have been separated.

3. Fig. 5 is not of good quality; it should be redrawn and

Response: Done Fig. 5 we redraw and rearrange it.

4. In Figs. 6 and 7, the fonts of the x and y axes should be the same.

Response: Thanks for catching this. Done, both of them are the same font and size.

Reviewer #2: Dear Editor; The attached article was checked. The manuscript contains interesting information about Chiliadenus iphionoides: From Chemical Profiling to Anticancer, Antioxidant, α-amylase, and α-glycosidase activities. I think that this article is well suited to your journal. It is generally good work. The scientific and presentation level of the manuscript is high. The title is understandable and in line with the text. The text is written in a descriptive and understandable language. The material and method are well described and adequately detailed Discussion and conclusion are interrelated.

Thank you for your comments and suggestions.

1. What is the difference between the study and existing studies?

Response:

-This is an excellent question. The plants studied were collected from Jericho, the lowest place on Earth and located very close to the Dead Sea. The soil in Jericho is unique, containing higher salt concentrations compared to other regions. Additionally, the annual precipitation in Jericho is approximately 200 ml. Based on our previous experience, the chemical composition of plants from Jericho differs from that of essential oils collected from other locations.

-Most prior studies have focused on the chemical composition of C. iphionoides essential oil and its antioxidant activity, but only two studies have addressed its anticancer activity. Furthermore, there are currently no studies investigating its α-glucosidase and lipase inhibitory activities. This gap in research presents an opportunity to explore the potential therapeutic benefits of C. iphionoides essential oil. Investigating its effects on α-glucosidase and lipase could reveal valuable insights into its role in managing metabolic disorders and cancer treatment.

- Also, we add a paragraph on the main manuscript line 226-230

2. add to the introduction, available in different on the wild edible plant studies

Response: we added these references as requested. Now they are Ref 4, 5 and 14 in the main and highlighted manuscript.

https://doi.org/10.1002/ardp.202300263

https://doi.org/10.1002/ardp.202400194

https://doi.org/10.1002/efd2.70021

Thank you for the suggested references. Done as requested

3. In ms: Write the name of the authority to the end of the plant’s name.

- http://www.theplantlist.org/

Please, read the paper and correct them all.

Response: Done as requested

4. The paper should be edited according to the writing rules of the journal

Original manuscript. There are, however, a few minor changes required.

Response: Done as requested

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: CIPHIO~1.DOC
Decision Letter - Uğur Cakilcioğlu, Editor

Chiliadenus iphionoides: From Chemical Profiling to Anticancer, Antioxidant, α-amylase, and α-glycosidase activities

PONE-D-25-21407R1

Dear Dr. Bsharat,

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,

Uğur Cakilcioğlu, PhD

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: (No Response)

**********

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: (No Response)

**********

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: Yes

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: Although there are many studies on the metabolite content and antioxidative antimicrobial effects of the extracts of various organs of Chiliadenus iphionoides in the manuscript, there is not enough research on the antioxidative, antimicrobial effects as well as anticancer effects of its essential oils. This situation increases the original value of the manuscript.

The authors have made the requested corrections. It is suitable for publication.

Reviewer #2: (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:  YASEMİN ÖZDENER KÖMPE

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Uğur Cakilcioğlu, Editor

PONE-D-25-21407R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Bsharat,

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

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days 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

Professor Uğur Cakilcioğlu

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 .