Reviewer name and names of any other individual's who aided in reviewer	Tianzuo Wang
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	It can be improved better.
Are all data available and do they match the descriptions in the paper?	Yes
Additional Comments
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?	Yes
Additional Comments
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	Shirasawa et al. reported a Chromosome-scale draft genome sequence of horsegram, and performed the analysis of comparative genomics. 1.If Pacbio data was used, the quality of genome can be improved much. 2.Only genomes of P. vulgaris, V. angularis and L. japonicus in the legume were used for phylogenetic analysis. Soybean and Medicago, as the model legume plants, should be added at last. 3.The section of Whole genome structure in horsegram should be introduced before Diversity analysis in genetic resources, Genes related to drought tolerance, and Transcript sequencing, gene prediction and annotation. Because genome information is the foundation of other analysis.
Recommendation	Major Revision