Ommatissus lybicus Infestation in Relation to Spatial Characteristics of Date Palm Plantations in Oman
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript describes an attempt to correlate various environmental factors with the infestation level of Ommatissus lybicus in date palm plantations in Oman. In addition to a number of minor issues, below, I have three main concerns about the presentation:
1) Although the aim of the study is presented at the end of the Introduction, it is still unclear what was known before and why this complementary study is needed. In the paragraph on lines 79-91 it is reported what has investigations have been done, but not really how different factors influence the infestation level. Please give more details on this.
2) This done, it will be easier to produce a more precise Abstract and Conclusions where the new findings are pointed out.
3) It is mentioned in some places that cultural practices paly a large role in explain the infestation variation. This is kind of serious, as ideally the cultural practice should be as similar as possible if other factors are investigated. If, for instance, insecticidal spraying is done very differently in different plantations, this could explain all the variation in infestation level, and the analysis of environmental factors is completely irrelevant. The authors have to describe how different practices were applied in the different plantations and evaluate what effect this may have on the outcome of the study.
Minor comments (row number):
15: selected
19: locations
20: please explain how the tree planting pattern looks like when it has a positive effect.
22: Cultural practices. Please see above.
26: Please provide order and family of the target species.
30-33: To me there are no differences, but very similar ranges. If anything is different, please provide means ± SEM and statistics.
36: The total average development time…
50-78: Please shorten this part!
61: agro-ecosystem
79-91: Please be explicit, see above.
107-118: Describe insect control measures and other relevant cultivation methods used, see above.
Fig. 1: No red dots are seen in the upper map! Please redo.
Table 1: I suggest “regular” and “semi-regular” instead of systemic (I guess you mean systematic?)
169: This statement is valid for some but not all sites.
Figure 2: How were the sites ordered, from lowest to highest infestation rate? Please explain.
Table 3. Shouldn’t the number of observations be 400?
234: were reduced
247: longer than that of their…
References: Too many for a short and rather restricted paper as this. In addition there are errors in many/most of the entries. Please follow journal instructions and be consistent! Some examples are species names in italics, genus name and higher classification names with capital first letter, journal names abbreviate or not, page numbers as pp, not p, countries with capital first letter, page numbers for all article having such.
Author Response
I am pleased to submit the revision of the Original research paper entitled “Agriculture” based on the comment of the reviewers.
We thank the reviewers for their comments, and we present a detailed list of responses to the referee's comments/criticisms/suggestions along with our action on them. All the responses are in italics and all highlighted in yellow in the manuscript.
Reviewer 1
The manuscript describes an attempt to correlate various environmental factors with the infestation level of Ommatissus lybicus in date palm plantations in Oman. In addition to a number of minor issues, below, I have three main concerns about the presentation:
1) Although the aim of the study is presented at the end of the Introduction, it is still unclear what was known before and why this complementary study is needed. In the paragraph on lines 79-91 it is reported what has investigations have been done, but not really how different factors influence the infestation level. Please give more details on this.
An explanation was added. Line 77 -80, 85-86 and 89-91. The study included new variables that have not been addressed in earlier studies especially in Oman, this was addressed in Line 94.
2) This done, it will be easier to produce a more precise Abstract and Conclusions where the new findings are pointed out.
3) It is mentioned in some places that cultural practices paly a large role in explain the infestation variation. This is kind of serious, as ideally the cultural practice should be as similar as possible if other factors are investigated. If, for instance, insecticidal spraying is done very differently in different plantations, this could explain all the variation in infestation level, and the analysis of environmental factors is completely irrelevant. The authors have to describe how different practices were applied in the different plantations and evaluate what effect this may have on the outcome of the study.
The effect of insecticide application and different cultural practices in Oman was studied earlier, by Al kindi et al 2017, therefore, the current study did not include these in this study to avoid repetition and to explore new variables.
Paragraph was added to highlight few cultural and main control practices in the studied location. Line 122 - 128
Minor comments (row number):
15: selected.
Revised. Line 15
19: locations.
Revised. Line 19
20: please explain how the tree planting pattern looks like when it has a positive effect.
An explanation was added. Line 21.
22: Cultural practices. Please see above.
An explanation was added. Line 23
26: Please provide order and family of the target species.
(Hemiptera: Tropiduchidae) was added. Line 29
30-33: To me there are no differences, but very similar ranges. If anything is different, please provide means ± SEM and statistics.
Means were added. Line 34 -38.
36: The total average development time…
Revised. Line 41
50-78: Please shorten this part!
Revised. Line 55-69.
61: agro-ecosystem.
Revised. Line 59
79-91: Please be explicit, see above.
An explanation was added. Line 76-79, 84-85 and 87-90.
107-118: Describe insect control measures and other relevant cultivation methods used, see above.
Same as the response of comment number 3. Line 22-128
Fig. 1: No red dots are seen in the upper map! Please redo.
Edited. Fig.1
Table 1: I suggest “regular” and “semi-regular” instead of systemic (I guess you mean systematic?)
Revised.
169: This statement is valid for some but not all sites.
The average of infestation for all locations was added to show the variance. Line 197-182
Figure 2: How were the sites ordered, from lowest to highest infestation rate? Please explain.
The sites were ordered to make better presentation of data from low to high, however, there was slight overlap to keep the location names in the same order in two graphs. Therefore, the figure caption does not state a description of site order.
Table 3. Shouldn’t the number of observations be 400?
Few trees sampled were missed during the data collection due to irrigation practices that spoiled the water-sensitive paper while the data was collected.
234: were reduced.
Revised. Line 244
247: longer than that of their…
Revised. Line 267
References: Too many for a short and rather restricted paper as this. In addition there are errors in many/most of the entries. Please follow journal instructions and be consistent! Some examples are species names in italics, genus name and higher classification names with capital first letter, journal names abbreviate or not, page numbers as pp, not p, countries with capital first letter, page numbers for all article having such.
The references were reduced and the scientific names were revised.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Overall this manuscript is written well, however needs to address following queries before any further proceedings
- line 125: Honeydew droplet method- give details
-line 126: same leaflets were used in all four seasons- unclear
-line 129: data collected from 4 consecutive seasons - unclear
- line 171: why can't you collect data on 0 infestation and high, over 5 infestation rate/leaflet
-line 220: variation in 216-218 season in infestation rate: provide variation in temperature, moisture level in soil, humidity level top soil
-Is there any co-relation between tree size, age of the leaflet and infestation rate
- line 227: How shading will impact infestation rate when you are not using uniform tree height, e.g. tall trees, which create micro-climatic condition like in oasis
- line 237: ideal distance of side growing area with date palm plantation
- line 242: name crops growing in side fields used in this study; rationale of side land area size in relation to infestation
- Can you make future prediction of severe infestation based on these results, especially under the climate change
Author Response
I am pleased to submit the revision of the Original research paper entitled “Agriculture” based on the comment of the reviewers.
We thank the reviewers for their comments, and we present a detailed list of responses to the referee's comments/criticisms/suggestions along with our action on them. All the responses are in italics and all highlighted in yellow in the manuscript.
Reviewer 2
Overall this manuscript is written well, however needs to address following queries before any further proceedings
- line 125: Honeydew droplet method- give details.
Sentence was added. Line 134-136.
-line 126: same leaflets were used in all four seasons- unclear.
Revised. Line 136-137
-line 129: data collected from 4 consecutive seasons – unclear.
The first sentence was extended to name the four seasons. Line 131-132.
- line 171: why can't you collect data on 0 infestation and high, over 5 infestation rate/leaflet.
It is clear from the graphs there was 0 infestation reading and there was result ≥ 5 insects/leaflets in two locations. The sampling was done randomly and all the tree were marked before the infestation season commenced. This was to avoid partiality.
-line 220: variation in 216-218 season in infestation rate: provide variation in temperature, moisture level in soil, humidity level top soil.
The weather or microclimate was out of scope of this study, and other articles have been published to include this parameter. This paper investigated the role of agro-ecosystem characteristic in Ommatissus lybicus infestation.
-Is there any co-relation between tree size, age of the leaflet and infestation rate.
This was out of scope of this study, sampling was done randomly, trying as much as possible to keep insect counting from same tree ages from all locations, this method is practised by researchers to estimate O. lybicus infestation. A different experimental setup will be needed to look at impacts of tree size, age, etc.
- line 227: How shading will impact infestation rate when you are not using uniform tree height, e.g. tall trees, which create micro-climatic condition like in oasis.
An explanation was added. Line 240-242
- line 237: ideal distance of side growing area with date palm plantation.
Most side growing area is used just near the date palm plantation without fixed distance and in traditional field is an extension of date plantation field. Maybe another experiment can be set up to investigate what is the ideal width of side growing areas. Similar work has been undertaken in cotton plantations to encourage natural enemies.
- line 242: name crops growing in side fields used in this study; rationale of side land area size in relation to infestation.
Sentences were added to explain the relation. Line 256-260
- Can you make future prediction of severe infestation based on these results, especially under the climate change.
The study was undertaken to understand the effect of different environmental factors in the infestation and there is a plan to make prediction maps of the location of high-risk infestation including other factors in future. Climate change impacts were not looked at in this paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
satisfied with authors response to queries.
