| Upload additional files | DRR-20201001/form/17102020_SB_Cannabis_Reference_Genome_revised (1).docx |
| Reviewer name and names of any other individual's who aided in reviewer | Wei Zhao |
| Do you understand and agree to our policy of having open and named reviews, and having your review included with the published papers. (If no, please inform the editor that you cannot review this manuscript.) | Yes |
| Is the language of sufficient quality? | Yes |
| Please add additional comments on language quality to clarify if needed | |
| Are all data available and do they match the descriptions in the paper? | No |
| Additional Comments | The BioProject PRJNA667278 is not accessible. |
| Are the data and metadata consistent with relevant minimum information or reporting standards? See GigaDB checklists for examples <a href="http://gigadb.org/site/guide" target="_blank">http://gigadb.org/site/guide</a> | Yes |
| Additional Comments | |
| Is the data acquisition clear, complete and methodologically sound? | Yes |
| Additional Comments | |
| Is there sufficient detail in the methods and data-processing steps to allow reproduction? | Yes |
| Additional Comments | |
| Is there sufficient data validation and statistical analyses of data quality? | No |
| Additional Comments | The size of the final genome assembly is significantly larger than the estimated size, which is indicative of redundancy. I would suggest removing the potential haplotype redundancy further. I would also suggest a k-mer analysis to validate the genome size. For a chromosomal assembly, the ratio of properly paired reads is lower than expected. |
| Is the validation suitable for this type of data? | Yes |
| Additional Comments | |
| Is there sufficient information for others to reuse this dataset or integrate it with other data? | Yes |
| Additional Comments | |
| Any Additional Overall Comments to the Author | |
| Recommendation | Major Revision |