Dear Dr. Jha,

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 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.

• 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,

Prafull Salvi, 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. 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.

3. Please amend the manuscript submission data (via Edit Submission) to include author Uday Chand Jha.

4. Please amend your authorship list in your manuscript file to include author Uday Jha.

5. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

6. Please remove all personal information, ensure that the data shared are in accordance with participant consent, and re-upload a fully anonymized data set.

Note: spreadsheet columns with personal information must be removed and not hidden as all hidden columns will appear in the published file.

Additional guidance on preparing raw data for publication can be found in our Data Policy (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-human-research-participant-data-and-other-sensitive-data) and in the following article: http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long.

7. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

Additional Editor Comments :

Reviewer 1:

This is very good study on heat stress tolerance in chickpea. The results are interesting and presented/discussed in details.

It may be accepted for publication after a few minor edits/corrections which are mentioned below:

1. Abstract-8th row: what is “seed (S%)’ ? Not clear. Please make correction, if required.

2. Page 9-5th row: In this sentence "As a cool-season legume, chickpea is well adapted to mild-temperature environments but highly susceptible to heat stress during vegetative and reproductive stages3" what does “stages3” indicate? Is it a reference [3] or something else ? Not clear'

3. Please check name of kabuli chickpea variety “Gokce”. Different and incorrect spellings of name of this variety are written in text, Tables and Figures. The correct name is "Gokce". Please verify check the correct name and replace in whole MS.

4. Page 10: In this sentence “The experiment was conducted under NS conditions at Kansas State University, Manhattan, in 2023–2024” but there is no mention about HS experiment, please check and make necessary corrections.

5. Page 16-first para: In this sentence “However, HS has been reported to decrease seed protein concentrations in crops such as mung bean [30,38], chickpea [18,24,39], soybean [38], Lens culinaris [22], and Lathyrus

sativus L[29]” keep uniformity for writing name of crop -write either common name or scientific name.

6. Table 1: CV for Carbon (C) is very low, i.e. 0.76 for NS and 0.95 for HS, please check.

7. Table 2: Concentration of Manganese (ppm) is very low, i.e. 6.5, please check again. It should be in between 30 and 40.

8. Table 5: Value of PC5 for Calcium (%) is ‘0’, please check.

Reviewer 2:

Dear author(s),

I have reviewed yor manuscript (PONE-D-25-29542) "Influence of Elevated Temperature on the Nutritional Profile of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Seeds". My comments and suggestions are provided below:

Title

1. Seeds in the title can be removed since seeds are used for nutrition in chickpea. Alternative title: Influence of Heat Stress on the Nutritional Profile of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Abstract

2. Change “those of chickpea” to “nutritional profile of chickpea”

3. A blank between effect and of

4. Change “cultivating eight chickpea genotypes” to “eight cultivated chickpea genotypes”

5. The following sentence must not be italicized seed carbon (C, %), protein (%), phosphorus (P, %), potassium (K, %), magnesium (Mg, %), sulfur (S, %), and manganese (Mn, ppm)

6. Change “seed (S%), seed iron (Fe, ppm),” to “sulfur (S%), iron (Fe, ppm),”. Readers are already aware that the edible portion of cultivated chickpeas is the seed.

7. Change “seed copper (Cu, ppm),” to “copper (Cu, ppm),”.

8. Change “seed C” to “C”

9. Change “seed M” to “Mg”

10. Change “seed protein” to “protein”

11. Please check others.

Introduction

12. Before reference [2] (BR2), FAOSTAT data should be updated, and the 2023 data (available). Write in 2023 in the sentence for readers.

13. BR3, The reference 3 should be written properly. Please avoid self-citation.

14. BR3-6, India is the largest chickpea-producing country; however, the given samples on heat stress (˃32°C) may be representative of a broader context (in the world).

15. BR12, Read the articles below for more and different references: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12030557; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05559-3.

16. BR13-14, a blank between that and temperatures

17. BR15, a blank between yield and by

18. BR17-19, a blank before [17-19]

19. BR20, a blank at the end of the sentence.

20. BR19, a blank before [19]

21. BR24, a blank before [24]

22. BR18, a blank between with and heat-sensitive

23. A blank between nutrition and traits

24. A blank between into and developing

25. Please use more references on chickpea.

M&M

Plant materials

26. Check Gockce? Why did you use one cultivar?

Experimental setup

27. What was the irrigation quantity?

28. A blank before non-stress

29. Some traits of the soil used in the experiment should be detailed.

30. Sowing, planting and harvesting dates should be given.

31. Change “Data analysis” to Data analyses”. There was more than one analysis.

32. Duncan or Tukey tests could be used instead of LSD.

Results

33. Remove soil from “Under normal soil conditions,” because NS was explained as non-stress (NS) conditions.

34. Remove the seed as well. You explained seed analyses before for readers.

35. Write conditions after NS

36. Change “under high salinity (HS) conditions” to “under heat stress (HS) conditions”

37. Check and correct seed yield per plant (SYP) under heat-stress (HS) conditions! 34.9 is higher than NS.

Protein and carbon concentration

38. Change “decreased protein concentrations” to “a decrease in protein concentrations”

39. Change “increased seed C” to “an increase in seed C”

40. Remove “seed” because you mentioned that analyses were made in the seed in M&M.

Micronutrients

41. Change “Gockce” to “Gokce”.

Seed yield per plant

42. Remove “identifying it as a potential candidate for heat tolerance breeding” from here to “Discussion”.

43. Abbreviations (G, T, HS, NS etc) were repeated. Please insist on full name or abbreviations through text.

Discussion

44. BR37, a blank before [37].

45. A blank between to and HS

46. BR39, a blank before has.

47. The scientific name of mung bean can be written.

48. The common names of Lentil and Lathyrus should be given.

49. The following sentence could be written as reference [63] “It is thought that the chickpea genotypes used in this study have different heat stress thresholds, as in Phaseolus species having different heat stress tolerances or sensitivities [63], which affect the variation of some macro and micronutrient contents.” 63. Tene et al., Star of biochemical traits of heat-tolerant and heat-sensitive Phaseolus genotypes in coping with heat stress. Plant Growth Regulation. 2025; doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-025-01340-4

Conclusion

50. The following sentence or similar sentence could be added in Conclusion, too. Chickpeas having the higher nutritional values under HS conditions were suggested to use in breeding programs.

References

51. All references should be checked and corrected according to “Guide for Authors”.

52. The scientific names of plant species should be italicized.

I hope you will find as useful my suggestion to improve your mn. Please use line numbers. Review was taken more time than I thought due to without line no.

[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?

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: This is very good study on heat stress tolerance in chickpea. The results are interesting and presented/discussed in details.

It may be accepted for publication after a few minor edits/corrections which are mentioned below:

1. Abstract-8th row: what is “seed (S%)’ ? Not clear. Please make correction, if required.

2. Page 9-5th row: In this sentence "As a cool-season legume, chickpea is well adapted to mild-temperature environments but highly susceptible to heat stress during vegetative and reproductive stages3" what does “stages3” indicate? Is it a reference [3] or something else ? Not clear'

3. Please check name of kabuli chickpea variety “Gokce”. Different and incorrect spellings of name of this variety are written in text, Tables and Figures. The correct name is "Gokce". Please verify check the correct name and replace in whole MS.

4. Page 10: In this sentence “The experiment was conducted under NS conditions at Kansas State University, Manhattan, in 2023–2024” but there is no mention about HS experiment, please check and make necessary corrections.

5. Page 16-first para: In this sentence “However, HS has been reported to decrease seed protein concentrations in crops such as mung bean [30,38], chickpea [18,24,39], soybean [38], Lens culinaris [22], and Lathyrus

sativus L[29]” keep uniformity for writing name of crop -write either common name or scientific name.

6. Table 1: CV for Carbon (C) is very low, i.e. 0.76 for NS and 0.95 for HS, please check.

7. Table 2: Concentration of Manganese (ppm) is very low, i.e. 6.5, please check again. It should be in between 30 and 40.

8. Table 5: Value of PC5 for Calcium (%) is ‘0’, please check.

Reviewer #2: Dear author(s),

I have reviewed yor manuscript (PONE-D-25-29542) "Influence of Elevated Temperature on the Nutritional Profile of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Seeds". My comments and suggestions are provided below:

Title

1. Seeds in the title can be removed since seeds are used for nutrition in chickpea. Alternative title: Influence of Heat Stress on the Nutritional Profile of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Abstract

2. Change “those of chickpea” to “nutritional profile of chickpea”

3. A blank between effect and of

4. Change “cultivating eight chickpea genotypes” to “eight cultivated chickpea genotypes”

5. The following sentence must not be italicized seed carbon (C, %), protein (%), phosphorus (P, %), potassium (K, %), magnesium (Mg, %), sulfur (S, %), and manganese (Mn, ppm)

6. Change “seed (S%), seed iron (Fe, ppm),” to “sulfur (S%), iron (Fe, ppm),”. Readers are already aware that the edible portion of cultivated chickpeas is the seed.

7. Change “seed copper (Cu, ppm),” to “copper (Cu, ppm),”.

8. Change “seed C” to “C”

9. Change “seed M” to “Mg”

10. Change “seed protein” to “protein”

11. Please check others.

Introduction

12. Before reference [2] (BR2), FAOSTAT data should be updated, and the 2023 data (available). Write in 2023 in the sentence for readers.

13. BR3, The reference 3 should be written properly. Please avoid self-citation.

14. BR3-6, India is the largest chickpea-producing country; however, the given samples on heat stress (˃32°C) may be representative of a broader context (in the world).

15. BR12, Read the articles below for more and different references: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12030557; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05559-3.

16. BR13-14, a blank between that and temperatures

17. BR15, a blank between yield and by

18. BR17-19, a blank before [17-19]

19. BR20, a blank at the end of the sentence.

20. BR19, a blank before [19]

21. BR24, a blank before [24]

22. BR18, a blank between with and heat-sensitive

23. A blank between nutrition and traits

24. A blank between into and developing

25. Please use more references on chickpea.

M&M

Plant materials

26. Check Gockce? Why did you use one cultivar?

Experimental setup

27. What was the irrigation quantity?

28. A blank before non-stress

29. Some traits of the soil used in the experiment should be detailed.

30. Sowing, planting and harvesting dates should be given.

31. Change “Data analysis” to Data analyses”. There was more than one analysis.

32. Duncan or Tukey tests could be used instead of LSD.

Results

33. Remove soil from “Under normal soil conditions,” because NS was explained as non-stress (NS) conditions.

34. Remove the seed as well. You explained seed analyses before for readers.

35. Write conditions after NS

36. Change “under high salinity (HS) conditions” to “under heat stress (HS) conditions”

37. Check and correct seed yield per plant (SYP) under heat-stress (HS) conditions! 34.9 is higher than NS.

Protein and carbon concentration

38. Change “decreased protein concentrations” to “a decrease in protein concentrations”

39. Change “increased seed C” to “an increase in seed C”

40. Remove “seed” because you mentioned that analyses were made in the seed in M&M.

Micronutrients

41. Change “Gockce” to “Gokce”.

Seed yield per plant

42. Remove “identifying it as a potential candidate for heat tolerance breeding” from here to “Discussion”.

43. Abbreviations (G, T, HS, NS etc) were repeated. Please insist on full name or abbreviations through text.

Discussion

44. BR37, a blank before [37].

45. A blank between to and HS

46. BR39, a blank before has.

47. The scientific name of mung bean can be written.

48. The common names of Lentil and Lathyrus should be given.

49. The following sentence could be written as reference [63] “It is thought that the chickpea genotypes used in this study have different heat stress thresholds, as in Phaseolus species having different heat stress tolerances or sensitivities [63], which affect the variation of some macro and micronutrient contents.” 63. Tene et al., Star of biochemical traits of heat-tolerant and heat-sensitive Phaseolus genotypes in coping with heat stress. Plant Growth Regulation. 2025; doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-025-01340-4

Conclusion

50. The following sentence or similar sentence could be added in Conclusion, too. Chickpeas having the higher nutritional values under HS conditions were suggested to use in breeding programs.

References

51. All references should be checked and corrected according to “Guide for Authors”.

52. The scientific names of plant species should be italicized.

I hope you will find as useful my suggestion to improve your mn. Please use line numbers. Review was taken more time than I thought due to without line no.

**********

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:  Sarvjeet Singh

Reviewer #2: Yes:  Cengiz TOKER

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-25-29542-Editor.docx

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-25-29542-Author.docx

Influence of Elevated Temperature on the Nutritional Profile of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Seeds

PONE-D-25-29542R1

Dear Dr. Jha,

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. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support .

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,

Prafull Salvi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #2: I am satisfied with the corrections on the MN. There may be typing errors in the MN, and you can check them during proof stage of the MN.

**********

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 #2: Yes:  Cengiz Toker

**********