Point to point response to the comments
Dear Editors,
Many thanks for you and the reviewers for the comments or suggestions on the MS.
We have revised the MS accordingly. The point to point responses as follows.
For reviewer A’s comments and corresponding responses
Comment 1: “Please specify in the abstract the medicinal function of gypenosides.”
Response 1: We have revised in the revised version.
Comment 2: “Reduce the abstract, stating the most important results (Please follow
the intructions to the authors and outline the abstract accordingly).”
Response 2: We have revised in the revised version.
Comment 3: “The authors should detail the difference between quality (measured in
PARs) and type (wave length) of light.”
Response 3: As light quality is determined by a certain range of light wavelength. In
the present study, the difference between quality and type of light concerns the
accuracy of light wavelength. For example, the wavelength of the so-called red light
in the present study is 625±20nm, which is located within 750-620nm (red light).
Accordingly, the 525±20nm within 570-495nm (green light) and 470±20nm within
475-450 nm (blue light). We have detailed the accurate wavelength of red, green and
blue light in the revised version. By the way, white light is a special compound light.
So, the white light other than compound light is preferred.
Comment 4: “Explain why you did perform a multivariate analysis? Please explain
with detail if you performed a MANOVA or an ANOVA for each response variable.
Then, please explain in the corresponding table the differences between treatments
(what the letters indicate) and the type of statistical analysis. In this way, the reader
does not have to go back to the text. Spell the scientific name in full in table and
figures. ”
Response 4: A multivariate analysis is used in this paper to determine whether the
difference is significance or not. We performed an ANOVA in Table 1 for each
parameter in different lights. In addition, the SPSS software was also used. We
have revised according to the comments above in the revised version.
Comment 5: “Please explai how you di perform the curve adjustments in Figures and
give details about it in the Methods section and in the figure legends.”
Response 5: It is adjusted in Excel. After finishing the curve tracing in Excel
normally, click the right mouse button on any part of the curve, a menu appeared
and “Format data series” option is at the bottom. A window appeared when
clicking it. There are 3 icons at the second line of the window. Clicking the first
icon of a bucket which means “Fill & line”, then comes a window. Ticking the
“smoothed line” option at the bottom of the left column, the fold line will become
smooth line. Here, we don’t think it is necessary to give details about this in the
Methods.
Comment 6: “The gypenosides concentration should be expressed on µmol g-1DW. ”
Response 6: We have revised in the revised version.
Comment 7: “The statistical analysis was absent for the transpiration variable. ”
Response 7: We have added the statistical analysis of the correlation between
transpiration and photosynthetic rate (Pn).
For reviewer B’s comments and corresponding responses
Comments: “The paper shows interesting data, and it may be consider to be
published in Botanical Sciences. The authors should attend some observations
indicated in the text, besides the authors should take with care the style because it
contains numerous spelling mistakes. ”
Responses: We have revised in the revised version.
For comments in the text
Comment 1: “The quantification of total gypenosides of each sample solution was
performed on the basis of absorbance with comparison to the standard curve.”
Response 1: From the standard curve, a formula is obtained and used to calculate the
content of total gypenosides.
Comment 2: “In the 2.2.3 Determination of total gypenosides, “The precipitation
was collected and dried at 60 ℃ until a light yellowish powder formed. The
powder was the crude total gypenosides. The reviewer want to know what
evidence is taken to assume this? ”
Response 2: We checked the powder with TLC (thin-layer chromatography). The
colorable dots of samples from leaf and stem were at the same position as the
standard sample did, so they were confirmed to be the same components.
(This
part didn’t present in methods section)
A: Standard sample of total gypenosides;
A B C
B:
Leaf
C:
Stem
Comment 3: What do you mean with “ 5000 r/ min”.
Response
3:
We
have
revised
“Revolution(s) Per Minute”.
Best wishes,
Shibiao Liu
2016-2-8
with
“5000
rpm”,
which
means