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.
Authors have revised the manuscript as per suggestions. Therefore, I recommend that manuscript can be accepted for publication.
The authors have revised the manuscript as per suggestions. Therefore, I recommend that manuscript can be accepted for publication.
The authors have revised the manuscript as per suggestions. Therefore, I recommend that manuscript can be accepted for publication.
The authors have revised the manuscript as per suggestions. Therefore, I recommend that manuscript can be accepted for publication.
The authors have revised the manuscript as per suggestions. Therefore, I recommend that manuscript can be accepted for publication.
Now the English language has been improved overall. All the concepts are clear and easy to understand.
After re-review, there has been no addition required. No further changes are required.
no comments. Findings are acceptable
Authors are advised to revise the manuscript as per comments and suggestions of the reviewers.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Please ensure that all review and editorial comments are addressed in a response letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate. #]
• What was the specific rationale to perform this study because several authors have reported this type of data already?
What was the criteria for selecting the no. of samples with respect to the various locations?
Results are not written properly. The authors should try to write concisely.
I have thoroughly reviewed the manuscript and suggested major revisions, mostly in the results and discussion that need to be clearly addressed by the authors before I can recommend the publication of the manuscript. My comments are as the following:
There are some general and specific comments:
• The work is quite interesting but the main innovative idea is missing.
• Moderate linguistic (English) corrections are desirable. In addition, the submitted version has numerous sentence framing/ phrase construction issues.
• Novelty of research work is also missing. Please add future recommendation.
• Some of the paragraphs are needs to be rearrange for better clarification.
• Avoid repeating the same information.
• Please improve discussion through some linking paragraphs and recent literature. This section is too lengthy.
• Please highlight the main or interesting findings for each parameter.
• Please include the clear take home message.
no comments
no comments
no comments
Self-contained with relevant results to hypotheses
Methods described with sufficient detail & information to replicate.
All underlying data have been provided; they are robust, statistically sound, & controlled.
In the manuscript “Factor analysis and cluster analysis of mineral elements contents of Pyrus ussuriensis Maxim. at maturity stage in Northeast China”, the authors have work hard to execute the current study”. Title of the manuscript is interesting and covers the scope of the journal. Nevertheless, the manuscript may be a suitable candidate for publication after the following amendments:
• Please add some necessary details to the background information in the abstract.
• Add name of some bioactive substances in Line 67.
• Figure 1 and 2 lacking standard error bar.
• Please subscript the P<0.01.
• Briefly write some future perspective in abstract.
• There are some typos and grammatical mistakes in the abstract and rest of the sections of the manuscript, please improve the language of the manuscript.
• Please write the keywords alphabetically. Don’t write those words as a keyword which is a part of manuscript’s title.
• What is novelty of the current study?
• Please clearly write hypothesis and objectives of the current study.
• What are the future perspectives of this study?
• Please give detail about statistic design and sampling size used during the current study.
• Please add further logical discussion about results obtained.
• Recheck all typos and improve overall formatting used in MS.
• References are not enough and up to date. Beside they are also not to the journal format.
• Conclusion looks like as an abstract. Rewrite the conclusion for better clarity.
This manuscript is well-written and contains concise information. Well-understanding information of manuscript for the reader present. All the references are relevant in this manuscript. But for more clarity reader cite more authentic literature. All the figures, and tables well organized and completely explained in the manuscript. Results are well-defined.
Research conducted to describe the issue, methodology is well defined. According to the title and journal policy research gap is filled by using modern techniques. collected information using the well precise methodology. The write-up of this paper is well structured and easy to understand for readers.
However, according to my opinion provided information for easy understanding
should be more descriptive. I suggested explaining the objectives of this research article with
more recent literature. In my opinion manuscript information for the reader
understanding, further, described in more depth. The overall theme of the manuscript is well
clear. Moreover, this is good quality research work, more its practical implication
in future perspective is needed for industrial purposes.
Line No. 141: Describe solution preparation reference.
Line No. 159: Describe for clear understanding blank solution of sample preparation.
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.