Peer Review History

Original SubmissionDecember 5, 2025
Decision Letter - Xiaona Wang, Editor

Gastrodia elata Alleviates Neuronal Damage in Chronic Epilepsy by Targeting P2RY12 Receptor to Inhibit Excessive Activation of Microglia

PLOS One

Dear Dr. Hu,

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 03 2026 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.. 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 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 . 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,

Xiaona Wang, Ph.D

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. Please note that funding information should not appear in any 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.

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

“This research is funded by Protective effect of SAHA on brain injury in developing epileptic rats and regulation of histone acetylation of TLR4 gene (2023JJ30532); The anti-epileptic mechanism of xyloketal B was explored based on network pharmacology from SIRT1/NF-κB/GMD mediated astrocytic pyroptosis, Excellent Project of the Shenzhen Longhua District Science and Technology Innovation Bureau (2025012); Research on improving the teaching effect of pediatric neurological diseases in Longhua District People's Hospital, teaching reform of Shenzhen Longhua District People's Hospital (2024251).”

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

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

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

4. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and in 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.

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.

6. Please remove your figures from within your manuscript file, leaving only the individual TIFF/EPS image files, uploaded separately. These will be automatically included in the reviewers’ PDF.

7. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

8. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

[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: I Don't Know

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??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: The description of statistical methods lacks sufficient detail. Please specify the exact statistical test used for each comparison (e.g., unpaired two-tailed t-test, one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test), and clarify whether assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance were assessed.

Reviewer #2: The article systematically investigated the effect and mechanism of Gastrodin, one of the main components of Gastrodia elata, on P2RY12 in a cell model of epilepsy. Experimental results indicated that Gastrodin suppressed microglial migration and F-actin remodeling, reduced TNF-α and IL-1β release, prevented neuronal calcium overload and apoptosis in epilepsy model cells, and thereby mitigated neuroinflammation and neuronal damage. The manuscript presents sound scientific research with significant reference value, but requires further improvement.

1. The title of the article requires improvement. The article primarily conducts research on the effect and mechanism of Gastrodin on P2RY12 in the epilepsy cell model. Therefore, the terms "Gastrodia elata" and "in Chronic Epilepsy" in the title are not sufficiently accurate.

2. In line 348~349, the contents of Figure 1d should be explained in detail. In addition, it is suggested that Figure 1d change the colors to more clearly represent the intersection of the three sets. The same modification applies to Figure 2e, as the black is too dark and impairs visual clarity.

3. The title of Figure 8, “Schematic diagram of the P2RY12-mediated signaling pathway in microglia in the epileptic state”, fails to reflect the regulation mechanism of Gastrodin, and need to be improved.

4. The paragraph (lines 682–693) lacks objectivity and rigor; it should rely on scientific facts, not subjective speculation. This also applies to the last sentence of the concluding paragraph.

5. Some symbols and formats are misused in this article, such as CO2 and so on. Moreover, the capitalization of the initial letter of Gastrodin is not uniform throughout the text. Please check and revise thoroughly.

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). 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  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.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Review.docx
Revision 1

Dear Xiaona Wang, Ph.D,

Thank you very much for considering our manuscript entitled "Gastrodin Alleviates Neuronal Damage in Epileptic Cell Models by Targeting P2RY12 to Inhibit Microglial Hyperactivation" (Manuscript number: PONE-D-25-64129) for publication in PLOS One. We are grateful to both the reviewers and the editor for their constructive comments and suggestions, which have greatly helped us improve the quality of the paper. We have carefully considered all the comments and have made the appropriate revisions to the manuscript. Below, we provide detailed responses to each of the points raised:

Response to Academic Editor

The funding information has been completely removed from the main text. We confirm that all funding‑related content has been deleted from the manuscript, and the funding declaration is only provided via the online submission system. The relevant statement has been added and updated in the cover letter accordingly.

Figures and blots/gels: All figures have been removed from the main text file and uploaded separately as TIFF files. All original uncropped, unadjusted blot/gel images are provided in the Supporting Information.

Response to Reviewer #1

Comment: The description of statistical methods lacks sufficient detail. Please specify the exact statistical test used for each comparison, and clarify whether assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance were assessed.

Response:We sincerely appreciate the valuable comments and suggestions you have provided on our manuscript. We deeply apologize for the inadequate description of the statistical methods. We have thoroughly revised the section "2.12 Data Statistical Methods" to clearly state the following: the Shapiro-Wilk test is employed for normality testing, the Levene test is used for homogeneity of variance testing, an unpaired two-tailed t-test is applied for comparisons between two groups, one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test is conducted for multiple-group comparisons, and for non-parametric data, the Kruskal-Wallis test combined with Dunn's test is utilized. The relevant modifications have been made in lines 316 to 324.

Response to Reviewer #2

Comment 1: The title is inaccurate. “Gastrodia elata” and “chronic epilepsy” are not sufficiently accurate.

Response:We are extremely grateful for your strict comments on the inaccuracy of the original title. In response to your suggestions, we have carefully revised the title to precisely define the research subject, experimental system and core mechanism. The revised title is as follows: Gastrodin Alleviates Neuronal Damage in Epileptic Cell Models by Targeting P2RY12 to Inhibit Microglial Hyperactivation.

Comment 2: Lines 348–349: Explain Figure 1d in detail; change colors of Figure 1d and Figure 2e for clarity.

Response:We sincerely thank you for your constructive suggestions on improving the presentation of the charts and graphs. We have supplemented a detailed description and interpretation of Figure 1d in lines 345 to 351 of the Results section. Additionally, the color schemes of Figure 1d (a Venn diagram) and Figure 2e have been adjusted to high-contrast light tones to enhance visual clarity and readability.

Comment 3: Figure 8 title fails to reflect the regulatory mechanism of Gastrodin; needs improvement.

Response:We sincerely appreciate your constructive feedback. To enhance clarity and accuracy, we have revised the title of Figure 8 to: "The mechanism by which gastrodin targets P2RY12 to inhibit the RhoA/ROCK pathway and microglial migration in an epilepsy model."

Comment 4: Paragraph lines 682–693 and the last sentence of the conclusion lack objectivity and rigor.

Response: We sincerely appreciate this constructive suggestion. We have carefully revised the paragraph spanning lines 682 to 693, as well as the last sentence of the conclusion section, to eliminate speculative and exaggerated expressions. All descriptions are now strictly based on the data and results obtained in this study, and the scientific objectivity and rationality of the conclusions have been significantly enhanced. Now, all conclusions are fully supported by our experimental evidence. The relevant modifications have been made in lines 677 to 693.

Comment 5: Errors in symbols (e.g., CO₂) and inconsistent capitalization of Gastrodin.

Response: We sincerely appreciate your meticulous corrections. We have carefully examined and revised the entire manuscript: the incorrect expression "CO2" has been uniformly corrected to "CO₂", and the capitalization of "Gastrodin" has been consistently maintained throughout the text to ensure formatting uniformity. All symbol and capitalization errors have been duly corrected.

We hope that the revisions and clarifications we have made will satisfactorily address the concerns raised by the reviewers. We would be more than willing to make further adjustments if necessary.

Thank you again for your consideration and for the opportunity to submit our work to PLOS ONE.

Sincerely,

Qingpeng Hu: huqingpeng163@126.com

Haixia Wu: 13923430437@163.com

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: 3.20Point by point response letter(1).docx
Decision Letter - Xiaona Wang, Editor

Gastrodin Alleviates Neuronal Damage in Epileptic Cell Models by Targeting P2RY12 to Inhibit Microglial Hyperactivation

PONE-D-25-64129R1

Dear Dr. Hu,

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  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,

Xiaona Wang, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Xiaona Wang, Editor

PONE-D-25-64129R1

PLOS One

Dear Dr. Hu,

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.

You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

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

Associate Professor Xiaona Wang

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 .