All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
I would like to express my appreciation for incorporating the referees' suggestions and enhancing your article accordingly. I believe your manuscript is now ready for publication. We look forward to your next article.
I would like to thank you for accepting of referees' suggestions and improving your article based on their suggestions. I think your article is almost ready to publish.
The paper needs English proofreading. For example in conclusions:
>> "Conclusively, it was found that 0.1 and 0.15 mM levels of ALA as seed
>> priming were found better to"
**Language Note:** The Academic Editor has identified that the English language must be improved. PeerJ can provide language editing services - please contact us at copyediting@peerj.com for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title). Alternatively, you should make your own arrangements to improve the language quality and provide details in your response letter. – PeerJ Staff
I want to thank you for accepting the suggestions of the reviewers. However, some issues should be completed.
Please write technical terms instead of abbreviations in the abstract.
The conclusion sentence in the abstract should be revised.
Please add which package was used in Rstudio.
Please check the lines following: 161, 162, 179, 202, 222, 237, 245, 392, and 434.
Please check the DOI numbers of the references.
Please check your title, especially (:).
There are a few grammatical and spelling errors in the article, despite your thorough review. I recommend seeking assistance from either a colleague or an editing service to refine and polish your article.
See the annotated file provided by Reviewer 3.
No comments
No comments
No comments
Authors answered all the queries and significantly improved the manuscript.
Nothing to declare.
Nothing to declare.
Nothing to declare.
Nothing to declare.
Mitigative treatments to reduce the adverse impacts of the drought will be one of the most important issues that scientists may spend so much time on in the future. Therefore, your article has valuable data for the next studies. However, your article needs a comprehensive revision in many aspects such as linguistics, the meaning of some statements, and conveying your thoughts to the reader. Please carefully read the reviewers' suggestions about your article. If you do not accept one or more of their suggestions, give your reasons.
**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review, editorial, and staff comments are addressed in a response letter and that any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate.
**Language Note:** The review process has identified that the English language must be improved. PeerJ can provide language editing services - please contact us at copyediting@peerj.com for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title). Alternatively, you should make your own arrangements to improve the language quality and provide details in your response letter. – PeerJ Staff
The manuscript titled "Ameliorating Impacts of Exogenously-Applied Alpha Lipoic Acid on Growth and Yield of Differentially Drought-Tolerant Mungbean Genotypes: Photosynthetic Pigments, Lipid Peroxidation, Antioxidative Defense Mechanism" reflects intensive work and has been well articulated. However, I have some comments that I think should be addressed to improve its status for acceptance and publication.
The article requires major revisions:
1. The abstract lacks numerical values in the key results. Providing numerical values along with the results would enhance its clarity and comprehensiveness. Implications are very general and broad. implications should be discussed based on ALA application.
2. In the introduction, Line 93, expand upon the problem in greater detail. Provide references and elucidate what sets your study apart and makes it distinct. After the objective in the last line of the introduction, authors should develop a further explanation of how they tackled that problem in the manuscript and a broader explanation.
3. It's essential to address English grammar and spelling errors throughout the article, as there are numerous incomprehensible phrases.
4. Ensure consistent and proper use of punctuation, including points, commas, spaces, and capital letters throughout the manuscript.
5. Regarding the discussion in Lines 504 and 505, update references to incorporate the latest literature on carbon metabolism, biomass, and phenolics under drought conditions. Incorporating recent literature will enrich the discussion. overall, the discussion is long and can be comprehensive.
6. The conclusion should be lucid and emphasize the novelty of your findings.
7. resolution of figured can be improved.
no comment
The conclusion should be lucid and emphasize the novelty of your findings.
no comment
The English language needs improvement.
Literature cited is appropriate
Professional article structure is good, tables , figures are ok, data is also shared.
It ok.
It is quite meaningful as mungbean is summer crop which needs attention of researcher. Till date it is cultivated by farmers and such problems have not been addressed.
Comments given on text of body.
The manuscript in general must be standardized, authors must review the journal's guidelines before trying to publish something.
Does the statistic meet the authors’ expectations?
I believe the experiment has its value, but I think it is necessary to mention where the doses came from.
No comment.
Nothing to declare.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.