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.
Dear Author, I am happy to inform you that your manuscript is accepted for publication in PeerJ in the current form.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Jasmine Janes, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
no comment
no comment
no comment
The revisions incorporated in the manuscript are commendable, the manuscript may be considered for publication.
Dear Author, this is an interesting piece of work as evaluated by both Reviewers, your manuscript should be however more focused and structured. Please improve your manuscript having in mind the suggestions provided by both Reviewers. Once this is done, you are most welcome to resubmit your manuscript to PeerJ. Good luck with your work!.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Please ensure that all review comments are addressed in a rebuttal letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate. It is a common mistake to address reviewer questions in the rebuttal letter but not in the revised manuscript. If a reviewer raised a question then your readers will probably have the same question so you should ensure that the manuscript can stand alone without the rebuttal letter. Directions on how to prepare a rebuttal letter can be found at: https://peerj.com/benefits/academic-rebuttal-letters/ #]
This article deals with the Ni stress in plants and plant-microbial interactions under Ni stress. Below are a few points I noted while reading this article:
Literature relating to the Ni stress in plants, and plant-microbial interactions under Ni stress could be expanded
Figures summarizing the establishment of plant-microbial associations under Ni stress could be included to significantly enhance the presentation efficiency
no comment
Conclusions could be further revised so as to highlight more details regarding research gaps.
'no comment'
'no comment'
'no comment'
The authors of this review made an excellent job of collecting data on plant responses to heavy metal stresses, mainly nickel, especially in the context of plant-microbe interaction. Therefore, this review may be useful for a wide audience including microbiologist, ecologist and plant physiologist at the same time.
Nevertheless, at the current stage this work needs some major changes, it seems to be the preliminary draft for making the review, and not the review itself. Authors have listed numerous information without placing them in the context or drawing some general conclusions. The structure of this work, which consists of many, often very short paragraphs, reflects itself the nature of such a draft. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies problems, and points out the research gaps and future direction.
The lists of key research questions to be answered should be better highlighted. This review should be more focused on the symbiotic and associative relationships with microorganisms, and interaction with plant growth promoting bacteria under Ni stress, and not the general plant stress responses to Ni.
English language should be improved. It is suggested to use the help of someone with full professional proficiency in English.
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.