replying to P. A. Penttilä and A. Paajanen Nature Plants https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-024-01689-w (2024)

To understand why Model 3 would provide a better fit, we conducted simulations and observed that a semi-disordered shell with a thickness of 4 Å could make critical contributions in the q-range of 0.25–0.30 Å⁻¹ (that is, the first oscillation), also causing the profile shape (0.15–0.25 Å⁻¹) to shift slightly towards the low-q direction (Fig. 3a). Although the q-range of 0.25–0.30 Å⁻¹ contains critical data about shell-layer thickness, it is usually inaccessible in SAXS experiments and thus ignored in the literature. If we use only the major streak data below 0.25 Å⁻¹ for fitting, the two-phase model still gives a core radius of 12.0 Å (n = 15, dry spruce). Our updated analyses are therefore consistent with the values reported in our original paper for dry spruce: a core radius of 11.9 Å (n = 9, by SAXS) and a shell thickness of ~4 Å (by nuclear magnetic resonance + SAXS)⁶.

replying to P. A. Penttilä and A. Paajanen Nature Plants https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-024-01689-w (2024)

为了理解为什么模型 3 能提供更好的拟合，我们进行了模拟并观察到厚度为 4 Å 的半无序壳可以在 0.25–0.30 Å ⁻¹的q范围内做出关键贡献（即第一个振荡），也导致轮廓形状（0.15–0.25 Å ^-1 ）稍微向低q方向移动（图 3a）。尽管 0.25–0.30 Å ^-1的q范围包含有关壳层厚度的关键数据，但在 SAXS 实验中通常无法访问，因此在文献中被忽略。如果我们仅使用低于 0.25 Å ^{-1 的}主条纹数据进行拟合，两相模型仍给出 12.0 Å 的核心半径（ n = 15，干云杉）。因此，我们更新的分析与我们原始论文中报告的干云杉值一致：核半径为 11.9 Å（ n = 9，通过 SAXS），壳厚度约为 4 Å（通过核磁共振 + SAXS） ⁶ 。