Ethylene Induced by Sound Stimulation Enhances Anthocyanin Accumulation in Grape Berry Skin through Direct Upregulation of UDP-Glucose: Flavonoid 3-O-Glucosyltransferase

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments

Dear authors,

This is an interesting manuscript and data presented are relevant to the field of study. Overall, the manuscript is potentially publishable. However, there are some issues to be addressed. Some suggestions with helpful feedback on the manuscript are below.

Major concerns:

Despite the in vitro protocol adopted to cultivate plant cells, would it be possible to investigate the effects of sound stimulation on anthocyanin accumulation using plant cell culture protocols with temperatures higher than 27 Celsius? Since the guiding and key question of the study is precisely heat-related anthocyanin losses from the change in global surface temperature (global warming).  

In statistical analysis, have all data been submitted to normality tests to justify the use of ANOVA/Tukey/Student’s t-test? If so, include this observation in the methodology.

Minor concerns:

- Abstract: Please, the authors should introduce the main methods adopted.

Author Response

Re: revision (Ms. Ref. No.: cells-1428515)

Dear Reviewer 1,

Thank you for your decision of October 14, 2021, informing us of the Editorial decision of Cells on our manuscript entitled, “Ethylene induced by sound stimulation enhances anthocyanin accumulation in grape berry skin through direct upregulation of UDP-glucose: flavonoid 3-O-glucosyltransferase” (Ms. No. : cells-1428515). We appreciate very much your constructive criticisms on our manuscript. We would like to submit our revised manuscript according to your comments. Our point-by-point response to the comments and detailing all changes made on the revised manuscript is as follows.

We very much appreciate your helpful suggestions. We hope that our answers are satisfactory and the revised manuscript is now acceptable for publication in the Cells.

Best wishes and thank you very much for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Shunji Suzuki

Reviewer’s comments:

This is an interesting manuscript and data presented are relevant to the field of study. Overall, the manuscript is potentially publishable. However, there are some issues to be addressed. Some suggestions with helpful feedback on the manuscript are below.

Answer: We very much appreciate your constructive criticisms on our manuscript. We prepared the revised manuscript according to the referees’ comments. Please evaluate our point-by-point responses to your comments.

We hope that our point-by-point responses are satisfactory and the revised manuscript is now acceptable for publication in the Cells.

Major concerns:

1. Despite the in vitro protocol adopted to cultivate plant cells, would it be possible to investigate the effects of sound stimulation on anthocyanin accumulation using plant cell culture protocols with temperatures higher than 27 Celsius? Since the guiding and key question of the study is precisely heat-related anthocyanin losses from the change in global surface temperature (global warming).

Answer: We appreciate your concerns on this point. Actually, grape berry skins exposed to 30 ºC nighttime temperature showed markedly less coloration compared with those exposed to 20 ºC nighttime temperature (Kliewer and Torres, Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1972, 23, 71-77). 27 ºC is close to 30 ºC. Regrettably, however, because of optimum temperature of grape cultured cells for anthocyanin accumulation, we are unable to perform the experiment at 20 ºC with grape cultured cells. Since sound stimulation helped trigger anthocyanin biosynthesis in berry skins of field-grown grapevines at the early stage of ripening, we consider the result from the experiment with grape cultured cells correct. For these reasons, we would like to retain the original text.

2. In statistical analysis, have all data been submitted to normality tests to justify the use of ANOVA/Tukey/Student’s t-test? If so, include this observation in the methodology.

Answer: Yes, it was. We added the information in the Material and section in the revised manuscript as follows:

        ‘2.11. Statistical analysis

Data are presented as means ± standard errors calculated from the indicated biological replicates. Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA variance analysis and then the Tukey multiple comparison test or the Student’s t-test using Excel statistics software 2012 (Social Survey Research Information, Tokyo, Japan).’

(See p. 5, lines 195-198, please)

Minor concerns:

1. Abstract: Please, the authors should introduce the main methods adopted.

Answer: We have taken the reviewer’s suggestion, and revised the ABSTRACT section in the revised manuscript.

(See p. 1, Abstract, please)

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting study. The authors have done an excellent job. Please refer to the enclosed file for suggested edits.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Re: revision (Ms. Ref. No.: cells-973630)

Dear Reviewer 2,

Thank you for your decision of October 14, 2021, informing us of the Editorial decision of Cells on our manuscript entitled, “Ethylene induced by sound stimulation enhances anthocyanin accumulation in grape berry skin through direct upregulation of UDP-glucose: flavonoid 3-O-glucosyltransferase” (Ms. No. : cells-1428515). We appreciate very much your constructive criticisms on our manuscript. We would like to submit our revised manuscript according to your comments. Our point-by-point response to the comments and detailing all changes made on the revised manuscript is as follows.

We very much appreciate your helpful suggestions. We hope that our answers are satisfactory and the revised manuscript is now acceptable for publication in the Cells.

Best wishes and thank you very much for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Shunji Suzuki

Reviewers' comments:

1. This is a very interesting study. The authors have done an excellent job. Please refer to the enclosed file for suggested edits. (peer-review-15090018.v1.pdf)

Answer: Thank you very much for your advice and proofreading to improve our manuscript. The manuscript was revised according to your suggestions.

        (See the revised manuscript, please)

We hope that our revision is satisfactory and the revised manuscript is now acceptable for publication in the Cells.