Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-x2lbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T15:54:28.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of seed morphology, seedling genetic variation, and components for seed storage of Agave landraces of commercial interest

Subject: Life Science and Biomedicine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 September 2022

Jesus A. Jimenez-Torres*
Affiliation:
Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Hidalgo, ICAP, Departamento de Bioquimica y Biologia Molecular, Tulancingo, Hidalgo 43600, Mexico Universidad Autonoma de Yucatan, Facultad de Ingenieria, Mérida, Yucatán 97302, Mexico
Zurisadai Monroy-Gonzalez
Affiliation:
Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Hidalgo, ICAP, Departamento de Bioquimica y Biologia Molecular, Tulancingo, Hidalgo 43600, Mexico Centro de Investigacion Científica de Yucatán, Departamento de Bioquimica y Biologia Molecular A.C., Mérida, Yucatán 97205, Mexico
Juana Juarez-Muñoz
Affiliation:
Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Hidalgo, ICAP, Departamento de Bioquimica y Biologia Molecular, Tulancingo, Hidalgo 43600, Mexico
*
*Corresponding author. Email: tlacametl@gmail.com

Abstract

Sexual propagation of Agave plants is an incipient cultivation method, these plants withstand drought and adverse growing conditions; therefore, research on Agave’s diversity, seed processing, and storage could support its cultivation on marginal lands. The aim of this work was to evaluate seed morphology, germination, and seedling genetic diversity of six seed origins (species × provenance) of Agave plants collected in five provenances from Mexico. Seed longevity was evaluated in two seed origins after a 10-year storage period. Seed morphology and seedling genetic variation results demonstrated intra- and interspecific variation within Agave salmiana and with the other seed origins, respectively. After a 10-year storage period seed germination of two A. salmiana seed origins remained relatively stable, storage conditions, and seed variables of this work can serve as reference parameters for future analyses. To the best authors’ knowledge, this is the first report of Agave’s seed longevity evaluation after a 10-year storage period.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Result type: Novel result
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Relative weight (RW), morphometric evaluation, and initial maximum germination (Max. Germ.) of seeds collected in 2012.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Andrews curves constructed with seed morphometric variables evaluated from A. americana (blue), A. mapisaga (red), and A. salmiana (purple) seed origins.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Dendrogram constructed according to the binary matrix of DNA bands amplified from seedlings of Agave seed origins (species × provenance) using Ward’s method (city block distance).

Figure 3

Table 2. Evaluation of maximum germination (Max. Germ.), SM content, RW, and DW of seeds after 55-month (SalmTlajo17) and 10-year storage period (SalmTlax and SalmMetβ).

Reviewing editor:  Bodil Jørgensen University of Copenhagen, Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Thorvaldsensvej 40, Frederiksberg C, Denmark, 1871
This article has been accepted because it is deemed to be scientifically sound, has the correct controls, has appropriate methodology and is statistically valid, and met required revisions.

Review 1: Evaluation of seed morphology, seedling genetic variation, and components for seed storage of Agave landraces of commercial interest

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none

Comments

Comments to the Author: After reviewing the work, it is suggested to strengthen the writing by attending to the following observations.

- The summary could improve if a justification of the work and the methods is included, also if the results and conclusions are deepened.

Methods

- Describe what farming systems and what is the intensity of farming from which the seeds come.

- Define and explain how the roundness of the seed was measured.

- In the analyzes of genetic diversity, how many individuals were analyzed by place of origin?

- Differentiate and explain the statistical analyzes of each of the experiments.

- Line 84. In agaves?

- Explain the main differences between harvesting green fruits and ripe brown fruits. Since it is understood that the green fruits used in this work could be harvested 3 to 4 months before being ripe.

- It is suggested to represent through graphs and multivariate statistical analysis the differences between the morphological characteristics of the seeds.

- Present data on genetic diversity by species and by population or origin place.

- Lines 165-167. Explain the factors mentioned throughout the writing and not only in a general way.

- The discussion needs to be compared with a greater number of works that exist on topics related to Agave.

Presentation

Overall score 3 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
4 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
3 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
2 out of 5

Context

Overall score 3.5 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
2 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
3 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
4 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 2 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
2 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
2 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
2 out of 5

Review 2: Evaluation of seed morphology, seedling genetic variation, and components for seed storage of Agave landraces of commercial interest

Conflict of interest statement

None

Comments

Comments to the Author: Methods

Germination as in 2.2 – should this refer to 2.1?

In one of the lines – 2000 milibar – “l” missing (millibar)

DNA purity measured by spectrophotometer – Please describe how this is done, OD etc.

Update the table with geographical information with references to all names used in the text. If you do not know the area it is very difficult to relate to the names used in the full text as these are not the same as used in the table. Consider showing a map to help the reader.

As it is now the result part is difficult to read as the names used is not mentioned for the areas in the table.

The results (table and figure) relate to the areas where the seed where collected. It is missing what the story to be told is for the different species collected – please elaborate.

Illustrations of the seeds stages and perhaps combined with how it is measured will be a help.

Table 1; the table text does not specify whether these results are from collecting time or later.

Include a table with comparison start and after storage.

Presentation

Overall score 3 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
3 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
3 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
3 out of 5

Context

Overall score 3 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
3 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
3 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
3 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
3 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 3 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
3 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
3 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
3 out of 5