Two New Marine Free-Living Nematodes from Jeju Island Together with a Review of the Genus Gammanema Cobb 1920 (Nematoda, Chromadorida, Selachinematidae)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

All new species names must be registered with ZooBank before the manuscript is published, and must be included in the text of the descriptions.

For both species it is important to add light microscopy photographs of structures that are hard to draw and interpret, especially stoma and spicules, which can be presented as multiple images at different focal points.

Table 3 has abbreviations that are not explained in the text, it is best to spell them out.

Drawing of the female reproductive system of Latronema obscuramphis needs to be added to the Figure 9.

Appendix A section was retained from a template and needs to be deleted.

Author Response

First of all, I am very thankful for your remarks.

Species names are registered in ZooBank and included in the text.

As for abbreviations in tables, I have included explanations in the text.

As for the suggestion to add new light microcopy photographs, it is now difficult to do since the type specimens are already deposited in the Museum.

I guess, the SEM-pictures (figs 4 B, C, F) shows quite clear the pattern of denticles in the buccal cavity of Gammanema okhlopkovi. Light microscopy photographs, even in series, are not able to present exact number and position of the denticles. Spicules of both species are depicted as correct as possible, in the male specimens chosen where the spicules lie in the focal plane.

As for female reproductive system of Latronema obscuramphis: normally, I provide drawings of female gonads in descriptions of species, but the ovaries of both female specimens look rather obscure for a good drawing. Now I attempt to describe an unusually high diversity of Latronema species on the summit of an isolated seamount. In connection with this project, I intend to undertake a revision of the genus. The species differ from one another mainly in body length and ratio a, amphid shape and size, anterior setae length, supplementary organs, spicule size and shape, but not in female reproductive system. Nevertheless, I will try to extract some other Latronema specimens from the samples to make correct comparison between species.

Once again, I thank you for your important suggestion.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article “Two new marine free-livinig nematodes from Jeju Island together with a review of the genus Gammanema Cobb 1920 (Nematoda, Chromadorida, Selachinematidae)” describes two new species of Gammanema and Latronema. It also revises the genus Gammanema and provides a very useful species identification key for the genus. The paper is both original, well written and has sufficient background information for most of the taxa mentioned. The descriptions are thorough.  

 

General comments: Descriptions are generally of high quality. There are, however, very few word choices that, as a non-native English speaker, I thought I struggled a little to understand. For those, I made suggestions of other words for easy understanding. The remainder is only very minor suggestions.

 

 

 

 

Specific comments:

L9 and L10 – The same affiliations. Possibly a typo.

 

L13 – Regarding the opening phrase “In frame of”, please see: https://community.languagetool.org/rule/show/FRAME?lang=en&subId=1 for alternative phrases (Correction suggestion: in connection with, in the context of, within the scope of). Please place a comma (,) after ‘(South Korea)’.

 

L32 – Please consider rephrasing the sentence starting with ‘However’. For example ‘However, the exploration of the rich nematofauna of Jeju is still in its early stages’.

 

L33 – Please see comments on L13

 

L38 – ‘characterised’ instead of ‘featured’

 

L44 – ‘Gammanema and Latronema are confined within’ or ‘confined to’

 

L45 – Please consider rephrasing this ‘as it follows from....’

 

L82 – Is ‘by’ the correct preposition to follow ‘terminates’ in this case?

 

L166 – Please check and add ‘of’ after ‘Identification’.

 

L167 – Table 1. Under the column ‘amphid’s width’ for Gammanema agglutinans, the values for both holotype and paratype males in the original description were 10 µm.

Please, also consider using ‘amphid width’ not ‘amphid’s width’ (the same for spicule length, in the case of supplements: ‘supplements shape’ and ‘number of supplements’)

Under ‘some particular bold features’ for G. magnus, ‘inequal’ is correct but an archaic usage of ‘unequal’. Please, correct.

 

L171 – Please consider using ‘sexes’ instead of ‘gender’. L218 – Should ‘…struts I n the median…’ be ‘…struts in the median…’ ?

 

L228 – I am not very sure, but could it be that you meant to use ‘represented’ instead of ‘presented’? I think that may be more appropriate for the sentence. There are a couple of such instances in the text, so if the intention was to use ‘represented’, please consider changing them.

 

L248 – Perhaps ‘reflexed’ instead of ‘reflected’.

 

L252 – ‘present’ instead of ‘presents’

 

L263 – Please consider changing the phrase, ‘In sum of characters’ or omitting it. Also, the definite article ‘the’ in front of okhlopkovi sp. n. can be omitted.

 

L283 – ‘punctated’ instead of ‘punctuated’. Also ‘under’ light microscope instead of ‘in’ light microscope.

 

L317 – Please, it is not clear to me what ‘intermediate cuticle’ means here. Are you talking about the inner wall of the posterior pharyngostome?

 

L356 – Maybe use ‘constitute’ or ‘make up’ instead of ‘compose’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

The article “Two new marine free-livinig nematodes from Jeju Island together with a review of the genus Gammanema Cobb 1920 (Nematoda, Chromadorida, Selachinematidae)” describes two new species of Gammanema and Latronema. It also revises the genus Gammanema and provides a very useful species identification key for the genus. The paper is both original, well written and has sufficient background information for most of the taxa mentioned. The descriptions are thorough.  

 

General comments: Descriptions are generally of high quality. There are, however, very few word choices that, as a non-native English speaker, I thought I struggled a little to understand. For those, I made suggestions of other words for easy understanding. The remainder is only very minor suggestions.

 

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your careful reading and remarks. I have considered and improved all the points you indicated.

 

Specific comments:

L9 and L10 – The same affiliations. Possibly a typo. Improved.

 

L13 – Regarding the opening phrase “In frame of”, please see: https://community.languagetool.org/rule/show/FRAME?lang=en&subId=1 for alternative phrases (Correction suggestion: in connection with, in the context of, within the scope of). Please place a comma (,) after ‘(South Korea)’. Improved.

 

L32 – Please consider rephrasing the sentence starting with ‘However’. For example ‘However, the exploration of the rich nematofauna of Jeju is still in its early stages’. Improved.

 

L33 – Please see comments on L13 Improved.

 

L38 – ‘characterised’ instead of ‘featured’ Improved.

 

L44 – ‘Gammanema and Latronema are confined within’ or ‘confined to’ Improved.

 

L45 – Please consider rephrasing this ‘as it follows from....’ Refrased (shortened).

 

L82 – Is ‘by’ the correct preposition to follow ‘terminates’ in this case? Improved.

 

L166 – Please check and add ‘of’ after ‘Identification’. Improved.

 

L167 – Table 1. Under the column ‘amphid’s width’ for Gammanema agglutinans, the values for both holotype and paratype males in the original description were 10 µm. Improved.

Please, also consider using ‘amphid width’ not ‘amphid’s width’ (the same for spicule length, in the case of supplements: ‘supplements shape’ and ‘number of supplements’)

Under ‘some particular bold features’ for G. magnus, ‘inequal’ is correct but an archaic usage of ‘unequal’. Please, correct. Improved.

 

L171 – Please consider using ‘sexes’ instead of ‘gender’. L218 – Should ‘…struts I n the median…’ be ‘…struts in the median…’ ? Improved.

 

L228 – I am not very sure, but could it be that you meant to use ‘represented’ instead of ‘presented’? I think that may be more appropriate for the sentence. There are a couple of such instances in the text, so if the intention was to use ‘represented’, please consider changing them. Improved.

 

L248 – Perhaps ‘reflexed’ instead of ‘reflected’. Improved.

 

L252 – ‘present’ instead of ‘presents’

 

L263 – Please consider changing the phrase, ‘In sum of characters’ or omitting it. Also, the definite article ‘the’ in front of okhlopkovi sp. n. can be omitted. Improved.

 

L283 – ‘punctated’ instead of ‘punctuated’. Also ‘under’ light microscope instead of ‘in’ light microscope. Improved.

 

L317 – Please, it is not clear to me what ‘intermediate cuticle’ means here. Are you talking about the inner wall of the posterior pharyngostome? Improved.

 

L356 – Maybe use ‘constitute’ or ‘make up’ instead of ‘compose’ Improved.

 

Best Regards, Alexei Tchesunov

Author Response File: Author Response.docx