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 Authors
I am pleased to inform you that after the last round of revision, the manuscript has been improved a lot, and it can be accepted for publication.
Congratulations on the acceptance of your manuscript, and thank you for your
interest in submitting your work to PeerJ.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Gerard Lazo, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
The Section Editor noted some specific corrections:
LINE NO: / BEFORE / AFTER / [COMMENTS]
LINE 173: / The present / In the present / [.]
LINE 174: / Fifty-five / fifty-five / [.]
LINE 175: / Fifty-five / fifty-five / [.]
**PeerJ Staff Note:** Although the Academic and Section Editors are happy to accept your article as being scientifically sound, a final check of the manuscript shows that it would benefit from further English editing. Therefore, please identify necessary edits and address these while in proof stage.
The manuscript is well revised
No comments
No comments
I reviewed the paper titled "Analyzing genetic diversity and molecular characteristics of wild centipedegrass using sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers". The authors had improved the manuscript, I recommend that this manuscript should be accepted as is.
The paper is good
In Scientific design
Good
No
no comment
no comment
no comment
The article is important and accepted
Dear Authors
The manuscript cannot be accepted for publication in its current form. It needs a minor revision to be reconsidered for publication. The authors are invited to revise the paper considering all the suggestions made by the reviewers. Please note that requested changes are required for publication.
Additional comments:
- Authors should scan the manuscript for minor punctuation and English errors (see attached).
- It is highly recommended to correlate the Seven morphological traits measured in 23 centipedegrass and the SRAP data.
- Change The word phenotype in the keywords; it does not refer to anything.
- Provide more details about the methods used to measure the morphological traits.
- As SRAP mentioned for the first time in the abstract, it must be written without abbreviation.
With Thanks
[# PeerJ Staff Note: It is PeerJ policy that additional references suggested during the peer-review process should only be included if the authors are in agreement that they are relevant and useful #]
[# 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. #]
[# PeerJ Staff 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) #]
The manuscript is well written but still needs some minor changes
No comments
No comments
I reviewed the paper titled "Analyzing genetic diversity and molecular characteristics of wild centipedegrass using sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers". The authors aimed to reveal the population genetic structure of of centipedegrass at the molecular level. Besides, assessment of morphological diversity to obtain more comprehensive information, which is of great significance for preserving valuable genetic resources, selecting high-quality germplasm resources and developing new varieties.
-Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Title
I suggest authors to make the title "Genetic diversity analysis and molecular characterization of wild centipedegrass using sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers"
Abstract
- Please find more corrections as track changes in the manuscript pdf file.
Introduction
-The introduction section is comprehensive and well written.
-Please find more corrections as track changes in the manuscript pdf file.
Materials and methods
-Please find more corrections as track changes in the manuscript pdf file.
Results
-The results section is well written.
- Please find more corrections as track changes in the manuscript pdf file.
Discussion
-The discussion section is well written but I suggest the authors to remove the subtitles from the discussion section.
Conclusion
-The conclusion section is well written.
References
Please unify the style according to the journal instructions
The manuscript entitled "Analyzing genetic diversity and molecular characteristics of wild centipedegrass using sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers"
in the scope of the journal, it was written in good scientific editing and I recommend publishing after minor revision:
1. Introduction: need more explanation and importance of the studied plant with recent references.
2. Results: Authors can add table illustrate different pca for the molecular study.
Discussion need more information, compare your result with previous related species.
Materials showing the collection of plant material, if you can add map for the collection study area
Result is good and you can add table showing different pca values
References need to be in 2023
With a little revision, the article will be ready
Table 1 analysis of variance (molecular variance is not correct)
Important findings
The article is important
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.