Review History


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.

View examples of open peer review.

Summary

  • The initial submission of this article was received on May 12th, 2023 and was peer-reviewed by 3 reviewers and the Academic Editor.
  • The Academic Editor made their initial decision on July 5th, 2023.
  • The first revision was submitted on August 4th, 2023 and was reviewed by the Academic Editor.
  • The article was Accepted by the Academic Editor on August 8th, 2023.

Version 0.2 (accepted)

· Aug 8, 2023 · Academic Editor

Accept

The authors followed all the requests of the reviewers.

[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Robert Winkler, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]

Version 0.1 (original submission)

· Jul 5, 2023 · Academic Editor

Minor Revisions

Your article requires a number of Minor Revisions.

[# 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. #]

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

The manuscript investigates the morphoanatomy of Serjania erecta, in particular it highlights the presence of the interaction between fungal structures of the complex Bipolaris/Curvularia and the plant tissues.
In my opinion the article is very clear, well written and it reports new findings in a field that has a great importance for medical application, expecially where the species is endemic and widely used.

Experimental design

The experimental design is clear and the procedures are well described. The authors observed the structures of the plant leaves and the presence of the fungal structures.

Validity of the findings

The findings are interesting and spread light on the potential use of this species.

Additional comments

In my opinion the article is very clear, well written and interesting.

Reviewer 2 ·

Basic reporting

The article has no linguistic gaps and is well structured. The only note to underline: in the introductory part I would add more information on the genus Serjania in general and I would introduce Serjania erecta with a botanical description of the species in question.

Experimental design

The experiments were conducted rigorously, containing suffiecient information to be reproducible by another investigator

Validity of the findings

No comments

Reviewer 3 ·

Basic reporting

English is clear and fluent
Something more about Serjania erecta should be added to the introduction.

Experimental design

The experimental design is well described, and the experiments fits with the aims of the study.

Validity of the findings

The topic is open to exploration, the findings represent a novelty in the field

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.