Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Nov 4;17(11):e0277136. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277136

Fusarium oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA): A rapid and efficient method for inducing the production of high quality agarwood

Zheng Zhang 1,#, Meng Xiang-zhao 2,#, Jiadong Ran 1,#, Mei Gao 1, Ning-xiao Li 3, Yi-mian Ma 1, Ying Sun 1, Yuan Li 4,*
Editor: Niraj Agarwala5
PMCID: PMC9635754  PMID: 36331933

Abstract

Agarwood, a non-wood product from the endangered Aquilaria and Gyrinops tress, is highly prized for its use in fragrances and medicines. The special formation process of agarwood is closely related to external injury and fungal infection. In this study, we demonstrate that infection of Aquilaria sinensis by Fusarium oxysporum, a soilborne fungus that causes vascular wilt diseases in diverse plants, induces agarwood formation. Based on these findings, an efficient method, termed F. oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA), was developed for the rapid production of quality agarwood. The agarwood formed in response to F. oxysporum infection was similar in structure and chemical composition to wild agarwood according to TLC (Thin-layer chromatography), HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography), and GC-MS (gas chromatography-mass spectrometry) analyses, except that the contents of alcohol-soluble extract, chromones, and essential oils (mainly sesquiterpenes) were higher in the formed agarwood.

Introduction

Agarwood is one of non-timber forest products with strong antibacterial effects in nature, and is widely used in traditional medicine for sedation, pain relief and digestion. It is also culturally significant due to its use in incense ceremonies in Asia, the Middle East, and Europe [1]. In fact, agarwood is the most expensive wood globally [2]. The price of agarwood sold as wood chips ranges from US$ 6,000 to 20,000 per kilogram, depending on the quality, while essential oils extracted from agarwood can be worth up to US$ 30,000 per kilogram. The global market value of agarwood is estimated to be between US$6 billion and US$8 billion annually [3]. Due to the depletion of natural sources of agarwood driven by high demand for the product, Aquilaria and Gyrinops, two important agarwood-producing genera, were listed as endangered species in 2002 [4].

Agarwood is a black resin that forms on the stems, branches and roots of injured Aquilaria and Gyrinops trees. The oleoresin of agarwood consists of a number of compounds, including sesquiterpenoids and phenylethyl chromone derivatives [5]. These compounds are not present in the healthy portion of Aquilaria wood, but rather in wounded or fungal-infected tissues [6, 7]. In general, wound formation and fungal infection are key factors in the formation of agarwood [810].

Many fungi isolated from natural agarwood, including Epicoccum granulatum [11], Fusarium sp., Chaetomium globosum [12], Acremonium sp. [13, 14], Botryosphaeria dothidea [15], Lasiodiplodia theobromae [16], and F. solani [1719] have been found to be effective at inducing agarwood formation. The main advantage of deploying biological agents to induce agarwood formation is their ability to cause agarwood production progressively and continuously over the course of the fungal infection [20]. However, the fungal strains isolated from wild Aquilaria trees are mostly endophytes or saprophytes. Fungi that are highly virulent to Aquilaria might be more effective in inducing agarwood formation [10, 18]. Fusarium solani, which is highly virulent to Aquilaria, resulted in the formation of a resinous zone during the first week, and successfully induced agarwood formation after 3 months [18, 19].

In order to help meet the demand for agarwood production while protecting wild Aquilaria trees, this study had three objectives: i) to identify fungal pathogens of Aquilaria that can induce the production of agarwood; ii) to compare the chemical constituents of pathogen-inoculated agarwood and wild agarwood; and iii) to evaluate the yield and quality of agarwood formed by fungal infection.

Materials and methods

Isolation and identification of fungal isolates

Fungi were isolated from the stems of surface-sterilized symptomatic Aquilaria sinensis trees obtained from Lingshui County, Hainan Province, China. After seven days of incubation on Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA) plates at 25°C, individual fungal isolates were purified using the hyphal tip isolation technique [21]. Mycelia and conidia were observed under a light microscope (Olympus BX51, Tokyo, Japan) for morphological characterization. Spore counts were performed using a haemocytometer. Genomic DNA was extracted from fungal mycelia using a Precellys 24 tissue grinder and EZNA™ HP Fungal DNA Kit (Omega, USA), according to the manufacturers’ instructions. PCR amplification of the ITS region was carried out using universal primers ITS1 (5’-TCCGTAGGTGAACCTGCGG-3’) and ITS4 (5’-TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC-3’). The resulting amplicons were sequenced from both ends by Genelab (Invitrogen, Beijing). Sequence obtained were used as queries to search in Genbank. After the preliminary screening of the effect of all the obtained isolates and A. sinensis, an effective culture of the F. oxysporum isolate (AsFo20150101) was described in this study. A phylogenetic analysis using ITS sequences was performed with 1000 bootstraps in Mega 7.0 to understand the relationship between AsFo20150101 (GenBank Accession MW880244) and previously identified Fusarium isolates [22].

Pathogenicity test and quantification of F. oxysporum in infected A. sinensis

Pathogenicity tests were conducted to determine whether the isolated F. oxysporum strain was the causal agent of vascular wilt in A. sinensis. Four-year-old A. sinensis trees planted in Xinyi County, Guangdong Province, China, were used. After sterilizing the trunk surface with 75% alcohol, a 4-mm diameter hole 20-mm deep was drilled in the stem approximately 300 mm above the ground to the trunk top, into which was injected 100 mL conidia suspension (1×106/mL) or ddH2O via a sterilized transfusion set and by exploiting the transpiration pull, as previously described [16]. The deep hole was immediately sealed with sterilized paraffin wax to prevent microbes’ invasion. The average data from three saplings (n = 3) in combination were statistically analyzed. After three weeks, 60-mm-long samples (with the bark removed) were collected at a height of 100 mm above the hole, and then 20-mm-long stem samples were used for histological observation as well as for qualitative and quantitative of F. oxysporum. The remaining 40-mm-long stem samples were immersed in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C for chemical analysis of agarwood. To satisfy Koch’s postulates, inoculated stem tissues were removed from seedlings exhibiting disease symptoms. After sterilizing with 70% ethanol, these stem tissues were then ground (1 gram per sample) using a Precellys 24 tissue grinder. Serial dilutions were plated on Komada plates (K2HPO4 (1 g), KCl (0.5 g), MgSO4·7H2O (0.5 g), FeNa-EDTA (0.01 g), L-asparagin (2 g), D-galactose (20 g), 1000 mL water) for F. oxysporum [23]. Genomic DNA of the resulting F. oxysporum strains was obtained and the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of ribosomal DNA was submitted to PCR using the F. oxysporum specific primers FOF1 (5’-ACATACCACTTGTTGCCTCG-3’) and FOR1 (5’-CGCCAATCAATTTGAGGAACG-3’), as previously described [24]. The PCR products of 340 bp were constructed to T vectors (pEasy-Blunt Simple Cloning Kit, TransGen Biotech), and then analyzed by the Shanghai bioengineering Co. LTD.

Histological observation of A. sinensis stems infected by F. oxysporum

A. sinensis stems infected by F. oxysporum could be divided into three zones after three weeks, labelled as the N (Necrosis), B (Border), and H (Health) zones (Fig 3A). Subsequently, 60-μm thick sections were obtained from above zones via a freezing microtome. Transverse sections of each sample were observed and photographed under a light microscopy, as previously described [25].

Fig 3. Histological observation of stems inoculated with F. oxysporum and wild agarwood sample of A. sinensis.

Fig 3

(A) Tangential section of A. sinensis stem inoculated with F. oxysporum 30 days post-inoculation, Bars = 10 mm. (B-D) Light microscope images of the transverse sections of the N (Necrosis), B (Border) and H (Health) zones, respectively, Bars = 50 μm. (E) Wild agarwood sample, Bars = 50 mm. (F) Transverse section of wild agarwood, Bars = 50 μm. IP: interxylary phloem, XR: xylem ray, V: vessel.

Chemical analysis of agarwood

Thin-layer chromatography (TLC)

TLC analyses were carried out as previously reported [26] with slight modifications. Each finely ground sample (1 g) was dissolved in methanol at concentration 40 mg/ml. After TLC analysis (GF254, 10 × 20 cm, Merck) using CHCl3:Et2O (10:1, v/v) as the mobile phase, 5% (v/v) H2SO4–EtOH solution was used for staining. Wild agarwood samples (resinous stem wood) were obtained from Yanfeng Town, Haikou City, Hainan Province, China, which formed naturally due to strong winds.

Content of alcohol-soluble extractive and essential oils

The alcohol-soluble extractive and essential oils were extracted and quantified as previously described [26]. Two grams of sample were immersed in 100 mL of 95% (v/v) ethanol for 1 h, refluxed in a condenser for 1 h, cooled, and then filtered. Twenty-five milliliters of the filtrate were dried in an evaporating pan to a constant weight. After drying and cooling for 3 h, the percentage of alcohol soluble extractive was calculated with reference to the dried sample powder. The determination of essential oil in a sample is made by distilling a sample (50 g) with water (800 mL) in a volatile oil determination apparatus, collecting the distillate in a tube in which the aqueous portion of the distillate is automatically separated and returned to the distilling flask. The extracted essential oil was isolated and dried with anhydrous sodium sulfate, weighed and stored in sealed amber flasks at −20° C until analysis. Calculate the percentage of essential oil with reference to the dried sample powder. The experimental procedure was repeated twice.

HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography) analysis

The five reference standards (5S,6R,7S,8R)-2-(2-phenylethyl)-5,6,7,8-tetraydroxy-5,6,7,8-tetrahydro chromone (AH1), 6‐hydroxy‐2‐2‐(4′‐methoxyphenylethyl)chromone (N), 6‐hydroxy‐2‐(2‐phenylethyl) chromone (AH3), 6,7‐dimethoxy‐2‐2‐(4′‐methoxyphenylethyl)chromone (AH8), and 6,7‐dimethoxy‐2‐(2‐phenylethyl)chromone (AH6) were prepared in our laboratory, and standard stock solutions were prepared by dissolving them in MeOH at suitable concentrations. The dried agarwood samples were powdered and screened through 40‐mesh sieves. Accurately weighed powders (approximately 0.5 g) of each tested sample were mixed with 25 mL of MeOH and then subjected to ultrasonic extraction (ultrasonic cleaner, 53 kHz, Kudos, Shanghai, China) for 1 h. The extracted solution was adjusted to the original weight by adding MeOH. The final solution was filtered through a syringe filter (0.22 μm).

Five f chromones, AH1, N, AH3, AH8, and AH6 in agarwood were simultaneously determined using a Waters HPLC system, as previously reported [27]. The HPLC analysis was performed at 35°C on a reverse-phase C18 column using the water/acetonitrile gradient elution method. For detection, a photodiode array detector calibrated at 252 nm and 231 nm was used.

GC-MS (gas chromatography-mass spectrometry) analysis

The composition of essential oils was determined using an Agilent Technologies 7890B gas chromatograph system equipped with an HP-5 MS capillary column and a 5977A mass spectrometer equipped with an ion-trap detector. The application conditions of GC-MS and the identification process of sesquiterpene compounds were referred to our previous study [16]. The carrier gas was helium, at a flow rate of 1 mL min-1. The injections were performed in splitless mode at 250°C. 1 μL of essential oil solution in hexane (HPLCgrade) was injected. The operating parameters were the temperature program of 50°C for 1 min, ramp of 10°C min-1 up to 155°C (15 min), subsequent increase to 280°C with an 8°C min-1 heating ramp, and keeping at 280°C for 10 min. The components were identified by comparison of their mass spectra with the NIST 2002 library data for the GC-MS system, as well as by comparison of their retention indices (RI) with the relevant literature data.19 The relative amount (RA) of each individual component of the essential oil was expressed as the percentage of the peak area relative to the total peak area. The RI value of each component was determined relative to the retention times (RT) of a series of C8-C40 n-alkanes with linear interpolation on the HP-5MS column.

Results

Morphological and molecular identification of F. oxysporum associated with vascular wilt in A. sinensis

The common disease symptoms of vascular wilt in A. sinensis include leaf yellowing, necrosis, and defoliation; these typically begin on the leaf margins of the lower leaves (Fig 1A–1C). As the disease progresses, the vascular system of the upper tap root and lower stem appears dark brown (DB) (Fig 1D), and eventually, the plant dies. The isolated fungal cultures formed white aerial mycelium and purple pigment (Fig 1E). The colony produced both microconidia and macroconidia (Fig 1F), which matched descriptions of F. oxysporum [28].

Fig 1. Symptoms of vascular wilt in A. sinensis trees and morphological characteristics of F. oxysporum isolated from an infected tree.

Fig 1

(A) Healthy tree branches. (B,C) Infected tree with yellowing, defoliation. (D) Symptoms after infection. A. sinensis stems are dark brown (DB) when infected by pathogens. (E) Fungal colonies formed on PDA after three days. (F) Microconidia (MI) and macroconidia (MA) of a 10-day-old F. oxysporum culture on PDA.

F. oxysporum was confirmed by sequence-based identification. The ITS sequence had over 99% similarity to nine F. oxysporum sequences available in GenBank. Phylogenetic analysis further confirmed that the isolated F. oxysporum was grouped with known formae speciales of F. oxysporum (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Phylogenetic analysis of the isolated F. oxysporum with a selection of Fusarium species.

Fig 2

Pathogenicity of F.oxysporum on A.sinensis

A. sinensis seedlings developed typical symptoms of vascular wilt such as leaf yellowing and wilting at 30 days post-inoculation (dpi) with F. oxysporum. Further, the vascular tissue of the stems also exhibited brown discolouration (Fig 3A). The stems were divided into three zones, N (Necrosis), B (Border) and H (Health) zones (Fig 3A). The H zone comprised white wood and vascular occlusions were absent in the vessels (Fig 3B). In zone B, brown or dark-brown resin filled in ray and axial parenchyma cells, as well as the vessels and wood fibres (Fig 3C). These features in the B zone are similar to those observed in natural heartwood, leading us to speculate that the B zone may contain agarwood substances (Fig 3E and 3F). In the N zone, ray and axial parenchyma cells were necrotic and fragmented, and fungal hyphae were found in the vessel lumens of the secondary xylem (Fig 3D). In summary, both the B and N zones are areas infected by F. oxysporum.

To fulfil Koch’s postulates, the pathogens in the different zones were isolated on selective media for F. oxysporum. The recovered isolates were morphologically identical to the inoculum. The F. oxysporum-specific gene regions were amplified from all recovered isolates, and their identity as F. oxysporum was further confirmed (Fig 4A). The colony forming unit (CFU/g) of the samples from the N, B, and H zones were isolated; the CFU/g decreased sharply from the N zone to the B zone, and then to the H zone. The largest number of F. oxysporum (13,700 CFU/g) was detected in the N zone and decreased to 3566 CFU/g in the B zone. In contrast, there was no F. oxysporum detected in the H zone (Fig 4B). The qualitative and quantitative results for F. oxysporum were consistent with the light microscope observations.

Fig 4. Identification and quantification of F. oxysporum in stems of A. sinensis after one-month inoculation.

Fig 4

(A) Agarose gel electrophoresis of PCR products using the F. oxysporum-specific primers FOF1 and FOR1, Lane 1: DL2000 DNA marker (Takara, Japan), Lane 2: F. oxysporum, Lane 3: negative control. (B) Distribution of the colony forming unit per one gram (CFU/g) of F. oxysporum in the N (Necrosis), B (Border) and H (Health) zones.

F. oxysporum induced agarwood formation

The TLC results revealed identical spots for the methanol extracts from infection zone, also called brown zone (B) which shown in Fig 1D and wild agarwood (W) which selected as a control, as visualized under UV254 and 365 nm (Fig 5A and 5B). In addition, B exhibited similar colour characteristics to W after colouring with 5% H2SO4–EtOH solution (Fig 5C). Further, there were more constituents and higher contents of non-polar compounds of agarwood from B compared to agarwood from W. The above experimental results show that the quality of the agarwood induced by F. oxysporum was similar and actually better than that of wild agarwood. However, there was no spot detected in healthy wood (H).

Fig 5. Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) chromatogram of methanol extracts.

Fig 5

TLC chromatogram visualized under UV254 nm (A) and UV365 nm (B). (C) Stained and immobilized TLC chromatogram.

Extracts from the H and B zones of the infected stems and from wild agarwood were analysed to determine the contents of alcohol-soluble extractive and essential oils. The yield of alcohol-soluble extractive of B was 15.60%, similar to that of W (14.32%). The yield of essential oils in B was 0.31%, which was much higher than that of W (0.17%). The contents of alcohol-soluble extractive and essential oils in H were 4.88% and 0.03%, respectively, much less than B and W (Fig 6).

Fig 6. The contents of alcohol-soluble extractive and essential oils in the brown zone (B), wild agarwood (W), and healthy zone (H).

Fig 6

(A) Alcohol soluble extractive content; (B) essential oil content.

Similar chromone profiles of B and W

Chromones extracted from H, B, and W were also analysed via HPLC to determine the contents of individual chromones in these zones (Fig 7). Comparison of each peak’s retention time with that of the five chromone standards in the same chromatographic system revealed that all five chromones were present in the B and W samples, but their contents in W were significantly lower than those in B (Fig 7). B had the highest chromones contents, with the major constituents being AH6 and AH1 (AH1 (4.2 mg/g), N (0.6 mg/g), AH3 (2.4 mg/g), AH8 (1.2 mg/g), and AH6 (6.2 mg/g), respectively). The predominant chromone in W was AH1 (AH1 (1.0 mg/g), N(0.1 mg/g), AH3 (0.1 mg/g), AH8 (0.2 mg/g), and AH6 (0.3 mg/g), respectively). In contrast, almost no chromones were detected in H (Figs 7 and 8).

Fig 7. HPLC chromatograms of five chromones in the brown zone (B), wild agarwood (W), and healthy zone (H).

Fig 7

The standard mixtures of (1) AH1, (2) N, (3) AH3, (4) AH8, and (5) AH6 are shown in (A). The presence of these chromones in H, B, and W are shown in (B-D).

Fig 8. The contents of five chromones in the brown zone (B), wild agarwood (W), and healthy zone (H).

Fig 8

The composition of essential oils in B was similar to that in W

Although B had a higher essential oils content than W (Fig 6B), B had similar components to W (Fig 9 and Table 1). Both these oils were rich in sesquiterpenes, accounting for 76.77% in B and 75.98% in W. Fifty-two components were identified in B, and most of constituents were sesquiterpenes compounds such as α-Eudesmol (8.37%), Aristolone (8.14%), cis-Z-α-Bisabolene epoxide (7.68%), and 2,2,6-Trimethyl-1-[(1E)-3-methyl-1,3-butadienyl]-5-methylene-7-oxabicyclo[4.1.0]heptane (5.21%). Fifty-four components were identified in the essential oils of W, where the predominant compounds were sesquiterpenes, including cis-Z-α-Bisabolene epoxide (9.07%), α-Eudesmol (8.24%), and Guai-1(10)-en-11-ol (7.09%). The essential oils of H had significantly different components to those of W and B. The essential oils of H contained a small amount of sesquiterpenes (8.14%) which was richly distributed in the oils from W and B. However, H was rich in alkanes, accounting for 64.95% of the total oil content (Table 1).

Fig 9. GC chromatograms of the three essential oils in the brown zone (B), wild agarwood (W), and healthy zone (H).

Fig 9

Table 1. Chemical composition and relative amounts of essential oils in the brown zone (B), wild agarwood (W), and healthy zone (H).

No.a Compound RIb RIc Relative amount / %d
B W H
Aromatic compounds 2.63 3.13 1.56
1 Benzaldehyde 960 977 0.01 0.02 -
2 Benzeneacetaldehyde 1044 1049 0.02 0.01 0.12
3 2-Butanone, 4-phenyl- 1248 1255 2.52 2.44 0.24
5 Benzaldehyde, 4-propyl- 1278 - - 0.09 0.23
7 Naphthalene, 2-methyl- 1302 1300 - 0.08 -
8 3-Buten-2-one, 4-phenyl- 1363 1346 0.01 - 0.30
16 Phenol, 2,4-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)- MS 1513 - - 0.28
47 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl) ester MS 1870 0.07 0.48 0.39
Sesquiterpenes 76.77 75.98 8.14
10 α-Guaiene 1416 1413 0.03 0.08 -
11 (+)-Longifolene MS 1428 0.09 0.06 -
12 Humulene 1462 1468 1.03 0.98 -
13 Azulene, 1,2,3,3a,4,5,6,7-octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethenyl)-, [1R-(1α,3aβ,4α,7β)]- 1479 1479 0.11 0.07 -
14 α-Selinene 1490 1490 3.87 0.89 0.20
15 2-Butanone, 4-(4-methoxyphenyl)- 1504 1473 0.35 0.69 -
17 2H-3,9a-Methano-1-benzoxepin, octahydro-2,2,5a,9-tetramethyl-, [3R-(3.alpha.,5a.alpha.,9.alpha.,9a.alpha.)]- MS 1501 0.35 0.25 -
18 4,6,6-Trimethyl-2-(3-methylbuta-1,3-dienyl)-3-oxatricyclo[5.1.0.0(2,4)]octane 1515 - 0.06 0.02 -
19 Cedranoxide, 8,14- MS 1539 - 0.03 -
20 Isolongifolan-8-ol 1520 1523 0.70 0.51 -
21 (-)-Spathulenol MS 1551 0.04 0.01 -
22 Cyclohexanemethanol, 4-ethenyl-.alpha.,.alpha.,4-trimethyl-3-(1-methylethenyl)-, [1R-(1.alpha.,3.alpha.,4.beta.)]- 1552 1542 0.36 0.29 -
23 2,6-Dimethyl-10-methylene-12-oxatricyclo[.0(1,6)]tridec-2-ene 1576 1579 - - 2.73
24 5β,7βH,10α-Eudesm-11-en-1α-ol MS 1588 0.45 0.32 -
25 Caryophyllene oxide 1596 1595 2.00 2.29 -
26 cedrenol 1604 1610 3.88 1.38 -
27 Isoaromadendrene epoxide 1606 1612 0.21 0.17 -
28 γ-Eudesmol 1625 1632 2.60 1.88 -
29 Octahydro-2,2,4,7α-tetramethyl-1,3α-ethano(1H)inden-4-ol 1630 1640 -e 1.50 -
30 Hinesol 1638 1638 1.82 3.00 -
31 Agarospirol 1645 1643 1.74 - -
32 (-)-Aristolene 1647 1657 3.73 4.10 -
33 α-Eudesmol 1652 1660 8.37 8.24 1.10
34 Guai-1(10)-en-11-ol 1669 1669 3.26 7.09 -
35 Aromadendrene oxide-(2) 1705 1704 0.99 1.14 -
36 2,2,6-Trimethyl-1-[(1E)-3-methyl-1,3-butadienyl]-5-methylene-7-oxabicyclo[4.1.0]heptane MS 1710 5.21 3.41 -
37 cis-Z-α-Bisabolene epoxide 1704 1713 7.68 9.07 -
38 6-Ethenylhexahydro-6-methyl-3-methylene-7-(1-methylethenyl)-2(3H)-benzofuranone MS 1740 1.02 0.46 -
39 Longifolenaldehyde MS 1741 0.53 0.50 -
40 Aristolone 1762 1761 8.14 4.05 -
41 (-)-Isolongifolol 1781 1771 1.99 1.56 0.29
42 2(1H)Naphthalenone, 3,5,6,7,8,8a-hexahydro-4,8a-dimethyl-6-(1-methylethenyl)- MS 1773 1.05 0.28 -
43 2(3H)-Naphthalenone, 4,4a,5,6,7,8-hexahydro-4a,5-dimethyl-3-(1-methylethylidene)-, (4ar-cis)- 1801 1828 3.32 3.75 -
44 Diepicedrene-1-oxide MS - 0.21 0.20 -
45 Acetic acid, 3-hydroxy-6-isopropenyl-4,8a-dimethyl-1,2,3,5,6,7,8,8a-octahydronaphthalen-2-yl ester MS 1847 1.75 2.97 -
48 7,9-Di-tert-butyl-1-oxaspiro(4,5)deca-6,9-diene-2,8-dione MS 1919 0.09 0.35 0.19
49 1,5-Dimethyl-3-hydroxy-8-(1-methylene-2-hydroxyethyl-1)-bicyclo[]dec-5-ene MS 1969 1.87 0.98 0.51
52 Eudesma-5,11(13)-dien-8,12-olide MS 1987 1.53 1.17 -
53 3-Oxo-10(14)-epoxyguai-11(13)-en-6,12-olide MS - 0.33 1.62 -
54 Cycloisolongifolene, 8,9-dehydro-9-formyl- MS - 0.77 4.36 -
Alkanes 1.97 4.80 64.95
4 Nonanoic acid 1268 1272 - 0.64 0.71
6 Pentadecane 1280 - 0.02 - 0.23
9 Tetradecane MS - 0.06 0.08 0.27
46 Pentadecanoic acid MS 1869 0.02 0.03 0.64
51 n-Hexadecanoic acid 1967 1964 0.03 1.09 17.15
55 n-Tetracosanol-1 2082 - 0.03 0.04 0.36
56 9,12-Octadecadienoic acid (Z,Z)- MS 2134 0.06 0.09 0.21
57 Oleic Acid 2138 2153 0.07 0.34 17.55
58 9-Tricosene, (Z)- MS 2298 0.16 0.04 2.94
59 Phenol, 2,2’-methylenebis[6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-methyl- MS 2398 1.02 0.84 15.37
50 Dibutyl phthalate MS 1959 0.51 1.61 9.53
TOTAL 81.37 83.92 74.65

Component numbers correspond to those in Table 1 and GC conditions are described in the Methods section of this paper.

a Order of elution is given on HP-5MS

b RI indicates reported in the literature for the HP-5MS column

c RI indicates the retention indices that were calculated against C8-C40 n-alkanes on the VF-5MS column

d relative amount determined as the peak area relative to the total peak area

e not detected.

Discussion

Agarwood has been used for many high-value products as incense, perfumes (essential oils), in medicine and religious ceremonies, but the formation of its resin is very rare and slow under natural conditions. For the sustainable development of the agarwood industry, many agarwood-producing countries (Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam) have been developed physical, chemical, and biological induction techniques. Among these three techniques, biological (fungal inoculation) induction is faster than physical induction and safer than chemical induction [29]. Use of fungal inoculum is highly prioritized among all type of fungi due to the regular growth of fungal mycelia which continuously spreads in the plant, resulting in wound development and high-yield agarwood formation [16]. Previous study has shown that crude extracts of Fusarium could not lead to the formation or accumulation of sesquiterpenes and 2–2 phenythylchromone in shoot culture of Aquilaria specie plants, whereas methyl jasmonate does [30]. This indicates that the process of agarwood formation induced by Fusarium is not caused by itself, but may be caused by the secretion of Fusarium generated to stimulate the defense response of plant, promote the production of endogenous hormones in Aquilaria, and then initiate the synthesis of agarwood components. In this study, the pathogen associated with the disease symptoms of vascular wilt on A. sinensis was isolated and identified as F. oxysporum based on its cultural and morphological characteristics, the ITS sequencing results, and pathogenicity assays. The disease severity indices showed that after inoculation with F. oxysporum, seedlings exhibited the typical symptoms of vascular wilt; in particular, the plants began to produce agarwood in the B zones of the inoculated stems. Thus, the results indicated that F. oxysporum effectively elicited agarwood production in the stem of A. sinensis. The agarwood from the stem produced by fungal inoculation had a similar structural and chemical profile to wild agarwood product naturally produced from the stem. Interestingly, the agarwood produced by inoculation had higher alcohol soluble extract contents, chromones contents, and essential oils (mainly sesquiterpenes) contents than the wild agarwood product.

Although many endophytic strains have been shown to induce agarwood production through artificial induction experiments, there are fewer studies of natural pathogens from agarwood trees. Cowan et al. [31] reported that under pathological conditions, plants have an unlimited ability to synthesize terpenes, aromatic compounds, and their oxygen-substituted derivatives, which inhibit the growth of the infecting agent. In the current study, for the first time, 52 components were identified from A. sinensis infected by F. oxysporum, and these were of a similar composition to that of wild agarwood, especially sesquiterpenes and aromatic constituents. These results indicate that F. oxysporum, the causal agent of vascular wilt on A. sinensis, is a promising fungal isolate that deserves further study. Further, there is a potential for scale up to a commercial level for production of agarwood and its essential oils.

Previously, we developed a novel method for the formation of agarwood named the whole-tree agarwood-inducing technique (Agar-Wit), in which, chemical inducers are injected into the xylem vessels of Aquilaria wood, leading to the formation of resin deposits in 6 months [1, 16]. The alcohol soluble extractive contents of the ten samples obtained by the Agar-Wit with ten different agarwood inducers ranged from 11.60% to 18.08%, all surpassing the required 10% standard, and similar to that of wild samples (10.56% and 19.30%). In this study, another faster technique for agarwood induction, known as F. oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA), was invented. After three weeks of fungal inoculation, the yield of alcohol-soluble extractive of B was 15.60%, exceeding that of W (14.32%). Furthermore, the yield of total five chromones (AH1, N, AH3,AH8, and AH6) and essential oils in B was 14.6 mg/g and 0.31%, which were much higher than that of W (1.7 mg/g and 0.17%). Taken together, the agarwood formed three weeks after FOIFA treatment had higher quality than the wild agarwood. We suggest that, using our FOIFA, qualified agarwood may be produced from Aquilaria trees in one month, and high-quality agarwood may be obtainable if prolonging the agarwood-formation time appropriately. These results confirmed that FOIFA was a fast and efficient method for inducing the production of high quality agarwood. The popularization and application of FOIFA in agarwood-producing countries (Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam) may consecutively supply more agarwood and essential oils to the international markets. This may not only satisfy the high demand for wild agarwood, but also conserve and protect wild Aquilaria trees.

Conclusions

In this study, a pathogenic fungus, Fusarium oxysporum, which can induce the production of high quality agarwood was found and identified. TLC (Thin-layer chromatography), HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography), and GC-MS (gas chromatography-mass spectrometry) analyses showed that the agarwood formed in response to F. oxysporum infection was similar in structure and chemical composition to wild agarwood, and the contents of alcohol-soluble extract, chromones, and essential oils (mainly sesquiterpenes) were higher in the formed agarwood. Based on these findings, an efficient method, termed F. oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA), was developed for the rapid production of quality agarwood.

Supporting information

S1 Raw images

(PDF)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by funds from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81773844, 31000136) and the Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (6102024). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Liu J, Zhang X, Yang J, Zhou J, Yuan Y, Jiang C, et al. Agarwood wound locations provide insight into the association between fungal diversity and volatile compounds in Aquilaria sinensis. R Soc Open Sci. 2019;6(7):190211. Epub 2019/08/17. doi: 10.1098/rsos.190211 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6689645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Naziz PS, Das R, Sen S. The Scent of Stress: Evidence from the unique fragrance of agarwood. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:840. Epub 2019/08/06. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00840 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6646531. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Tan CS, Isa NM, Ismail I, Zainal Z. Agarwood induction: current developments and future perspectives. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:122. Epub 2019/02/23. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00122 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6374618. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.CITES. Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora.Appendices I, II, and III of CITES.; UNEP.2005. p. 48. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Gao M, Han X, Sun Y, Chen H, Yang Y, Liu Y, et al. Overview of sesquiterpenes and chromones of agarwood originating from four main species of the genus Aquilaria. RSC Advances. 2019;9(8):4113–30. doi: 10.1039/c8ra09409h [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ito M, Okimoto K-i, Yagura T, Honda G, Kiuchi F, Shimada Y. Induction of sesquiterpenoid production by methyl jasmonate in Aquilaria sinensis cell suspension culture. Journal of Essential Oil Research. 2005;17(2):175–80. doi: 10.1080/10412905.2005.9698867 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kumeta Y, Ito M. Characterization of delta-guaiene synthases from cultured cells of Aquilaria, responsible for the formation of the sesquiterpenes in agarwood. Plant Physiol. 2010;154(4):1998–2007. Epub 2010/10/21. doi: 10.1104/pp.110.161828 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2996018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Mohamed R, Jong PL, Zali MS. Fungal diversity in wounded stems of Aquilaria malaccensis. Fungal Diversity. 2010;43(1):67–74. doi: 10.1007/s13225-010-0039-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mohamed R, Jong PL, Kamziah AK. Fungal inoculation induces agarwood in young Aquilaria malaccensis trees in the nursery. Journal of Forestry Research. 2014;25(1):201–4. doi: 10.1007/s11676-013-0395-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Turjaman M, Hidayat A, Santoso E. Development of agarwood induction technology using endophytic fungi. In: Mohamed R, editor. Agarwood: Science Behind the Fragrance. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2016. p. 57–71. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bhattacharyya B, Datta A, H B. On the formation and development of Agaru in Aquillaria agallocha. Sci And Culture. 1952;18(5):240–3. doi: 10.1111/hpb.12327 PMID: 025158227. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Tamuli P, Boruah P, Nath SC, Leclercq P. Essential oil of eaglewood tree: a product of pathogenesis. Journal of Essential Oil Research. 2005;17(6):601–4. doi: 10.1080/10412905.2005.9699008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.G R P PJAL. Acremonium and methyl-jasmonate induce terpenoid formation in agarwood tree (Aquilaria crassna). Makalahdi presenta sikandalam 3rd Asian conference on crop protection; Aug; Jogyakarta 2007. p. 22–4. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.G R. Increasing fragrance and terpenoid production in Aquilaria crassna by multi-application of methyl-jasmonate comparing to single induction of Acremonium sp. International conference on microbiology and biotechnology; Nov; Jakarta 2008. p. 11–2. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tian J-J, Gao X-x, Zhang W, Wang L, Qu LJAJoB. Molecular identification of endophytic fungi from Aquilaria sinensis and artificial agarwood induced by pinholes-infusion technique. 2013;12:3115–31. doi: 10.5897/AJB11.3159 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zhang Z, Wei J, Han X, Liang L, Yang Y, Meng H, et al. The sesquiterpene biosynthesis and vessel-occlusion formation in stems of Aquilaria sinensis (Lour.) Gilg trees induced by wounding treatments without variation of microbial communities. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15(12):23589–603. Epub 2014/12/23. doi: 10.3390/ijms151223589 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4284782. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Siburian R, Siregar U, Siregar I, Santoso E, Wahyudi I. Identification of anatomical characteristics of Aquilaria microcarpa in its interaction with Fusarium solani. Biotropia. 2013;20:104–11. doi: 10.11598/btb.2013.20.2.4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Faizal A, Esyanti RR, Aulianisa EN, Iriawati, Santoso E, Turjaman M. Formation of agarwood from Aquilaria malaccensis in response to inoculation of local strains of Fusarium solani. Trees. 2016;31(1):189–97. doi: 10.1007/s00468-016-1471-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Faizal A, Azar AWP, Turjaman M, Esyanti RR. Fusarium solani induces the formation of agarwood in Gyrinops versteegii (Gilg.) Domke branches. Symbiosis. 2020;81(1):15–23. doi: 10.1007/s13199-020-00677-w [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Chhipa H, Chowdhary K, Kaushik N. Artificial production of agarwood oil in Aquilaria sp. by fungi: a review. Phytochemistry Reviews. 2017;16(5):835–60. doi: 10.1007/s11101-017-9492-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Alwahshi KJ, Saeed EE, Sham A, Alblooshi AA, Alblooshi MM, El-Tarabily KA, et al. Molecular identification and disease management of date palm sudden decline syndrome in the United Arab Emirates. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(4). Epub 2019/02/23. doi: 10.3390/ijms20040923 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6412958. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol Biol Evol. 2016;33(7):1870–4. Epub 2016/03/24. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw054 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8210823. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Komada H. Development of a selective medium for quantitative isolation of Fusarium oxysporum from natural soil. Review of Plant Protection Research. 1975;8:114–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Jiménez-Fernández D, Montes-Borrego M, Navas-Cortés JA, Jiménez-Díaz RM, Landa BB. Identification and quantification of Fusarium oxysporum in planta and soil by means of an improved specific and quantitative PCR assay. Applied Soil Ecology. 2010;46(3):372–82. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.10.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Sun Y, Gao M, Kang S, Yang C, Meng H, Yang Y, et al. Molecular Mechanism underlying mechanical wounding-induced flavonoid accumulation in Dalbergia odorifera T. Chen, an endangered Tree That Produces Chinese Rosewood. Genes (Basel). 2020;11(5). Epub 2020/05/02. doi: 10.3390/genes11050478 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7291145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Commission CP. Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Beijing,China: China Medical Science Press; 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gao M, Han X, Huang J, Sun Y, Liu Y, Chen H, et al. Simultaneous determination of multiple active 2-(2-phenylethyl)chromone analogues in agarwood by HPLC, QAMS, and UPLC-MS. Phytochem Anal. 2021;32(3):412–22. Epub 2020/09/18. doi: 10.1002/pca.2989 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Leslie JF, Summerell BA. The Fusarium Laboratory Manual 2006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Du T-Y, Dao C-J, Mapook A, Stephenson SL, Elgorban AM, Al-Rejaie S, et al. Diversity and biosynthetic activities of agarwood associated fungi. Diversity. 2022;14(3). doi: 10.3390/d14030211 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Faizal A, Esyanti RR, Adn’ain N, Rahmani S, Azar AWP, Iriawati, et al. Methyl jasmonate and crude extracts of Fusarium solani elicit agarwood compounds in shoot culture of Aquilaria malaccensis Lamk. Heliyon. 2021. Apr 16;7(4):e06725. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06725 ; PMCID: PMC8080053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Cowan MM. Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12(4):564–82. Epub 1999/10/09. doi: 10.1128/CMR.12.4.564 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC88925. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Niraj Agarwala

25 Feb 2022

PONE-D-22-01806Fusarium oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA): a novel method for inducing the production of high quality agarwoodPLOS ONE

Dear Dr.xiangzhao,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. After reviewing the manuscript and by going through reviewers comments I feel that the authors should clearly mention the innovativeness and novelty in the method reported in the manuscript.

Please submit your revised manuscript by within sixty days of the date of this decision. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Niraj Agarwala, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "This work was supported by funds from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81773844, 31000136) and the Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (6102024). "

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: "The author(s) received no specific funding for this work"

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

5. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels. 

  

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

6. Please upload a new copy of Figure 9 as the detail is not clear. Please follow the link for more information: https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/06/looking-good-tips-for-creating-your-plos-figures-graphics/" https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/06/looking-good-tips-for-creating-your-plos-figures-graphics/

7. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

Reviewer #3: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear authors, after a thorough revision of the manuscript titled “Fusarium oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA): a novel method for inducing the production of high-quality agarwood”, I would summarize my comments/recommendations as follows -

This study experiments with a particular isolate of Fox and validates its virulency and agarwood formation capacity. It is not clear from the MS why only a single Fox isolate was used in the study and the justifications for choosing the same. The role of other co-occurring microbes in the overall process of virulency and agarwood formation has not been discussed. It is apparent that the roles of those co-occurring microbes were completely ruled out during the experimentation part as well as MS written part. In this way, it is too early to say that only the said strain of Fox is responsible for better agarwood formation. Besides, the environment too plays a considerable effect in this regard, there is a lack of discussion on this too. In many places, the experimental details are not sufficient or not properly written to replicate the same. And the way in which the term “novel” is being used in places needs reconsiderations or justifications in the MS. These issues need to be addressed in the MS in order to make it complete.

1. The title “Fusarium oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA): a novel method for inducing the production of high-quality agarwood” mentions this as a novel method, while there are reports of Fusarium spp. induced agarwood formation “Example - Faizal, A., Esyanti, R.R., Aulianisa, E.N. et al. Formation of agarwood from Aquilaria malaccensis in response to inoculation of local strains of Fusarium solani. Trees 31, 189–197 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-016-1471-9”. Therefore, the authors should reconsider incorporating the term “novel” in the title of the MS.

2. Line 65-66 says that “in order to help meet the demand for agarwood production while protecting wild Aquilaria trees, this study had three objectives” but from the MS, it is nowhere discussed how the isolate reported in this study are protecting wild Aquilaria trees. There should be at least a few sentences in the discussion section regarding this.

3. Objective 1 in Line 66-67 says that “i) to identify fungal pathogens of Aquilaria that can induce the production of agarwood”, but the procedures and results describe only one Fusarium strain, and there is no justification why this particular isolate was used out of all the isolates.

4. Line 83: rewrite - “Sequence obtained were used as queries to search in Genbank”

5. Line 84: Mention why only F. oxysporum isolate (AsFo20150101) was used in this study, and give the BLAST results of all other isolates (which you have sequenced) in supplementary data.

6. Line 90-93: Mention the number of replica plants.

7. Line 95: Mention the exact time of harvesting stem tissues in dpi (day post-inoculation).

8. Line 99: “submitted to PCR” – mention which region/gene was amplified.

9. Line 101: The statement “The PCR products were checked using gel electrophoresis” is too vague to speculate what was done afterward. There should be a clear mention of whether the amplicon was sequenced or just visualized with control bands.

10. Line 112: “at 40 mg/ml” Rewrite as “at concentration 40 mg/ml”.

11. Line 117-118: The procedure should be briefly described.

12. Line 133: The conditions under which chromatography was carried out should be mentioned.

13. In Figure 2: The Fox isolate used in this study should be distinctly visualized from the remaining database isolates. Also, mention the strain number of the isolate (which you have assigned), and the accession number of the submitted sequence like those mentioned for database isolates in your phylogenetic diagram.

14. The discussion is a repetition of the results, making the content in this section very small. All the findings should be justified and critically discussed with reference to existing literature.

15. Line 247-249: “In this study, another novel technique for agarwood induction, known as the fungal agarwood inducing technique (Agar-Fit), was invented” – this statement is self-contradictory as earlier in the material method section (Line 93-94) it has been mentioned that the inoculation was done by following a method described by Zhang et al., 2014. Therefore, again reconsider using the term “novel” here.

16. Line 253-254: “the yield of agarwood can be further improved by combining biological inducers and chemical agents” – this sentence is too vague to state as there is no mention of an experiment in which the reported Fox strain was co-inoculated with chemical agents.

Reviewer #2: I have reviewed the paper thoroughly. There is merit in the findings that establishes Fusarium as a strong associate in agarwood -fungus ecology related to agarwood formation. The association of fungus in agarwood formation is a complex phenomenon which is still not clearly understood and has been known to involve several genera of filamentous fungi. The complex ecology also includes insects that probably create injuries for fungi to establish well. Studies that investigate this aspect are welcome as this has potential for artificial induction of agarwood in plantations and spare the natural trees of which only few are left under threat of extinction. But, it must be kept in mind at the same time that the association of Fusarium with agarwood is well known and since agarwood artificial infection is a commercially employed practice with high level of propriety and secrecy, it is quite likely that the same might be in use in formulations used by commercial agarwood producers already. At the same time, the study has a number of scientific and methodological shortcomings which need to be looked into extensively by the authors.

#1. The title needs revision (Ref: Line No. 1). The term FOIFA in line with AgarWit is misplaced since the paper does not establish it as a comprehensive technique for field inoculation. The passing mention is made only in the discussion and no comparative study of the two or different methods of infection has been provided to justify a new improved method.

#2. The information about the organism (Fusarium oxysporum strain) provided is very limited. The isolation, initial number of different isolates, screening from the lot and basis of selection are not presented. As per authors Fusarium solani has the most virulent association ((Ref: Line No. 62)

#3. Material and methods part needs a complete overhaul.

# 3.1. The experimental design for inoculation- how many plants, age of the plants, time period, frequency of success is missing. This should in fact have been clearly presented in a scientific manner and hence and detailed reports on it are required to make any proper assessment. (Ref: Line No. 90)

#3.2. Experimental details like selective media, primer sequence, amplicon size etc are missing (Ref: Line No. 97-101).

#3.3 The inoculation studies and pathogenicity test cannot be differentiated. Are they one and the same? Details are not clear ((Ref: Line No. 102-107).

# 3.4. An important reference resinous agarwood referred to as Wild agarwood (W) has been taken against which the present technique is compared. However its details particularly of source and nature are missing.

#3.5. The HPLC study selected 4 chromones. The basis for such selection is not clarified, source of sample, method of sample preparation are not discussed and source of standards not mentioned making the study weak. ((Ref: Line No. 120-128)

#3.6. The process of alcohol extract and essential oil being critical to the study require explanation and details. The authors have just mentioned a reference (Gao et al 2020). (Ref: Line No. 116-119)

#4. For the results provided I have the following observations:

#4.1. The data on isolation of fungi their screening etc is missing (as in #2)

#4.2. The results on the inoculation and its difference from pathogenicity study are missing (as raised in 3.1 to 3.4)

#4.3. TLC results ((Ref: Line No. 173-181) needs revision. Authors mentions “more constituents and higher contents…” which is not explained in Fig 5 or anywhere else.

#4.4. Chromone study I feel needs a complete revision. The points raised in 3.5 and in Fig 7, chromatogram B, C and D seem to tell a different story than what is mentioned in the manuscript particularly with regard to (if Fig 7D is W).

#4.5. GC results (Ref Table 1)indicate that a major sesquiterpene of agarwood agarospirol is undetected in control (W) which makes the choice of W as a reference for comparison unclear. Hence the claim of better sesquiterpene yield by the FOIFA method is confusing. The gain in B over W seems to be contributed mostly by high alpha selinene for which references are limited for agarwood. Please explain in detail.

#4.6. The figure 9 ABC legends are missing. So without knowing which chromatogram is what it is not possible to assess.

Reviewer #3: The technology used here is a very well known technology. it lacks new knowledge or science. Fu.ngal infection and physical methods and combitaion of both are well known see review CHHIPA and Kaushik ( 2017)

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Supriyo Sen

Reviewer #3: Yes: Nutan Kaushik

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Nov 4;17(11):e0277136. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277136.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


7 Jul 2022

Response to reviewer #1: Dear reviewer, we appreciate for your valuable suggestions on the problems existing in the article. After reviewing your comments carefully, the following are my responses to your suggestions:

1. The title: did reports Fusarium oxysporum can induce the formation of agarwood, and we study on the basis of justifying the formation of the new technology to rapid and efficient high-quality aloes, and as a result, we are also in the title changed, more prominent we validate the technology of rapid and efficient, in order to more relevant to our research.

2. Line 309-318: We added this part in the discussion about how the isolate reported in this study are protecting wild Aquilaria trees,this was indeed not shown in the previous content, thank you for your advice.

3. Line 49-59: We mention that many kinds of extracts have been obtained from natural agarwood, and the toxicity and induced of these extracts to agarwood have been reported,and Fusarium oxysporum is highly virulent to Aquilaria was known, so that we chose this particular isolate for our study

4. Line 78: We have corrected the mistake, thanks for your suggestion.

5. Line 79: In the research process, we focused on the influence of Fusarium oxysporum on the quality of agarwood, and did not discuss other strains in depth. We think this is not the main research direction of this paper, which is also our follow-up research target.

6. Line 88-99: According to your advice, we have added the specific description of sample handling and improved the relevant information.

7. Line 88-99:As above, we have added relevant content.

8. Line 105-108: Amplified gene information has been supplemented.

9. Line 109: We have clarified the subsequent verification process in the article.

10. Line 122: Your comments are very detailed, and we have revised them. Thank you.

11. Line 128-140: We have supplemented the specific operation steps, which is very important for the integrity of our research.

12. At line 160, we have added corresponding contents. Thank you for your suggestions.

13. Figure 2: According to your suggestion, we have modified the picture in order to fully reflect the relevant information.

14. Line 264: The discussion part of the article is really limited, and we also hope that it can be helpful to relevant research without causing trouble, so we have added some justified and critically discussed as you suggested.

15. Line 286: As you mentioned earlier, the term "Novel" really does not capture the focus of our research. Therefore, we have reconsidered this aspect and thank you again for your preciseness

16. Line 297: We have corrected this statement to make it clearer and more valuable for reference. Thank you for your advice.

We appreciate again for your meticulous suggestions on this study, so that our paper has been better supplemented and modified. We look forward to your reply to our revised draft again, thank you! Best wishes!

Response to reviewer #2: Dear reviewer, Thank you very much for your affirmation and recognition of our research. We know that this technology may be of great value in production application, so we have made corresponding changes to your suggestions.

1. As for the title (line 1), in this paper, we focus on FOIFA this novel technology for the influence of the quality of aloes, also found that the technique can really improve the production of high quality aloes, so we think that the technology in the production of artificial aloes with innovative significance and application value, which is a kind of improvement of production methods of artificial agarwood.

2. At line 67, according to your suggestion, we have carried out detailed description and information provision for the isolated strains to ensure the reliability and credibility of the strains we used, which is very important for this technology. Your opinion also ensures the integrity of the method.

3. As for materials and methods, our description of some details is indeed insufficient, and we also refer to a lot of relevant literature published by the laboratory before, without considering a complete description of all materials and methods in this paper. In this revised draft, We have clearly explained the details of plants (line 86), genes (line 76), samples (line 88), HPLC (line 142) and extraction process (line 128) you mentioned, and hope the supplementary content can answer your doubts.

4. As for the results, as you mentioned, we have supplemented some missing key information data. Such as fungus in the process of separation of the screening data were added in the method (line 67), the data and results to organize and expounded, and the results of GC to complete interpretation (Table 1), indeed can explain the increase of the ratio W B is aloes quality enhancement, but also changed the image of legend, to complete our results, these have been revised in the manuscript, Thank you very much for asking these questions to ensure the integrity of the article.

We appreciate again for your meticulous suggestions on this study, so that our paper has been better supplemented and modified. We look forward to your reply to our revised draft again, thank you! Best wishes!

Response to reviewer #3: Dear reviewer, in this paper, we focus on FOIFA this novel technology for the influence of the quality of aloes, also found that the technique can really improve the production of high quality aloes, so we think that the technology in the production of artificial aloes with innovative significance and application value, which is a kind of improvement of production methods of artificial agarwood. Thanks a lot! Best wishes!

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Niraj Agarwala

11 Aug 2022

PONE-D-22-01806R1Fusarium oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA): a rapid and novel efficient method for inducing the production of high quality agarwoodPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. xiangzhao,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 25 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Niraj Agarwala, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear authors, the updated version of the manuscript has been improved in many ways than the previous version. However, there are many aspects in the manuscript where I find the facts presented a bit rimy and superficial. I also feel a lack of general veracity as several of my comments has been deliberately ignored or misunderstood. In general, would like to put my comments as follows:

1. Line 79 – 80: From the description of the subsection “Isolation and identification of fungal isolates” under the section “materials and methods” it is clear that many fungal isolates were isolated from surface-sterilized symptomatic Aquilaria sinensis trees. Among all the isolates the F. oxysporum isolate (AsFo20150101) was selected for the study. But it has not been properly justified why among all, this particular isolate was chosen. The description you are citing (Line 49 – 59) does not justify that. Mention the reason why other isolates were ruled out for the study and why isolate AsFo20150101 was kept; that will suffice.

2. In Figure 2: The accession number of the Fox isolate used in the study is still missing in the phylogenetic tree. It should be mentioned.

3. The discussion section is still not adequate as per the journal requirement. There are many earlier reports where Fox isolates have been reported to induce agarwood formation, where the underlying mechanisms and factors have been deciphered. The discussion section of this manuscript should draw the connections from earlier studies and justify the (possible) mechanisms/roles of the AsFo20150101 for the results shown in the current investigation.

With these modifications, the manuscript will be complete.

Reviewer #2: The Title "novel" should be replaced by "efficient" ; presently both words appear complicating the readability of the title

Reviewer #3: they addressesd all issues. manuscript may be accepted. agarwood research needs more attention as its larg scale application is limited

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Nutan Kaushik

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Nov 4;17(11):e0277136. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277136.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


23 Sep 2022

Response to reviewer #1: Dear reviewer, thank you for your careful review of our manuscript, and we are very sorry for some of the unintentional mistakes we caused in responding to your previous comments. We have carefully made the following changes to your comments:

1.Line 79-80: As you have said, there are many fungal isolates that we has isolated from surface-sterilized symptomatic Aquilaria sinensis trees. But unfortunately, after our preliminary screening, only the F. oxysporum isolate (AsFo20150101) showed significant effect, which is why our research revolves around this effective isolate,we also made modification in the article to eliminate the misunderstanding.

2.In Figure 2: We have inserted the accession number of the F. oxysporum isolate used in the study(MW880244.1) into the phylogenetic tree, we apologize for not noticing this in the previous revision.

3.Indeed, we did not thoroughly explore the potential mechanism of agarwood formation induced by Fusarium before. Therefore, we combined with the previous study to explore the possible mechanism of the F. oxysporum isolate for the results shown in the current investigation, hoping to supplement the missing content.

We appreciate again for your meticulous suggestions on this study, so that our paper has been better supplemented and modified. We look forward to your reply to our revised manuscript again, thank you! Best wishes!

Response to reviewer #2: Dear reviewer, thank you for your suggestion about the title modification, which makes our title more readable and easy to understand. Thank you again for your suggestion and wish you a happy life.

Response to reviewer #3: Dear reviewer, thank you for your affirmation of our research and work. We also hope that our research can be of some help to the application of agarwood. Thanks again and wish you happiness

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Niraj Agarwala

21 Oct 2022

Fusarium oxysporum infection-induced formation of agarwood (FOIFA): a  rapid and efficient method for inducing the production of high quality agarwood

PONE-D-22-01806R2

Dear Dr. xiangzhao,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Niraj Agarwala, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear authors, all the issues have been addressed properly and formatted as per the journal requirements. Therefore, the manuscript is ready now.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Supriyo Sen

**********

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Raw images

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES