Coleopteran Pollinators of Annonaceae in the Brazilian Cerrado—A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The general content of the paper is of primary interest in the field on conservation biology and I thank the authors in pointing out the attention on this relevant topic.
However it is difficult to get the point of the review given the lack of a proper introduction with a clear aim. Furthermore I would recoment to add a Mat & Method section where to explain how and where the literature has been recovered and cosulted. (do not demand these sections to the abstract as you have done).
Please, there are several scientific names NOT in italics and missing the describer names.
Check the references, because the stile is not fully guidelines compliant.
best
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Review report 1
The general content of the paper is of primary interest in the field on conservation biology and I thank the authors in pointing out the attention on this relevant topic.
We appreciate the positive comment on our review manuscript.
However it is difficult to get the point of the review given the lack of a proper introduction with a clear aim. Furthermore I would recoment to add a Mat & Method section where to explain how and where the literature has been recovered and cosulted. (do not demand these sections to the abstract as you have done).
We accepted the suggestion of restructuring the text into a formal Introduction and Material and Methods. We further added an new figure (map) highlighting the (georeferenced) Cerrado study sites considered in our review, and indicating (inserted numbers) the literature references referring to each study site.
Please, there are several scientific names NOT in italics and missing the describer names.
Done.
Check the references, because the stile is not fully guidelines compliant.
Done.
Remark on raised Keyword issue:
For a review publication with a wide and complex array of different information topics such a repetition of keywords is a service demand for retrieval platforms with literature search machines to better draw attention to the spectrum of topics raised in a review, which is different to the normal one topic focused research paper.
Thanks for your help to improve our manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Good to read the review on beetle and Annonaceae. I could have accepted the paper with minor revision however I found some issues that were provided below. I hope the author could easily address it.
the author forgot to compare the location Cerado region to the whole of Brazil and color part that have written is wrong. So the author is required to review it again. I have provided some literature and they have to find more literature for that sections.
Authors compiled work from Cerado region, but it will be nice to present overall Brazil and Cerado for this group at least to show the graphical representation
Total in y-axis and Brazil and Cerado region in x-axis how many of the Annonaceae and pollinates by beetles or similar at first in the first part of review sections. Then continue to show why Cerado region is important and so on.
Line 292-325, either completely drops this vision part or revisit all the literature. What the author has mentioned here is not all correct. See below for some references as well but do a better literature search if you really want to include these sections.
Also correct the whole manuscript if the color section is removed.
Italicized all scientific names.
some reference:
Sharkey, C.R., Fujimoto, M.S., Lord, N.P. et al. Overcoming the loss of blue sensitivity through opsin duplication in the largest animal group, beetles. Sci Rep 7, 8 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00061-7
Lord, N.P., Plimpton, R.L., Sharkey, C.R. et al. A cure for the blues: opsin duplication and subfunctionalization for short-wavelength sensitivity in jewel beetles (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). BMC Evol Biol 16, 107 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0674-4
Author Response
Review report 2
Good to read the review on beetle and Annonaceae. I could have accepted the paper with minor revision however I found some issues that were provided below. I hope the author could easily address it.
Comments appreciated.
the author forgot to compare the location Cerado region to the whole of Brazil and color part that have written is wrong. So the author is required to review it again. I have provided some literature and they have to find more literature for that sections. Total in y-axis and Brazil and Cerado region in x-axis how many of the Annonaceae and pollinates by beetles or similar at first in the first part of review sections. Then continue to show why Cerado region is important and so on.
Comparison with other Brazilian biomes: We would have loved to compare cantharophily in Annonaceae between Brazilian biomes but failed to find suitable references for such a purpose. This was one of the reasons why we decided to write this review to stirr-up the interest of scientists in the topic to study beetle pollination in Annonaceae in different Brazilian biomes and beyond.
Color vision part: We revised and maintained this important part of our review and even showed it to a specialist who didn´t find any objections against our data interpretation. Stating that our interpretation is wrong without pin-pointing to what issues are wrongly addressed is not helpful.
For reasons of conciseness the following text was added: Duplications of opsin genes have also been found in flower-visiting beetles from families Nitidulidae, Curculionidae, and Scarabaeidae, which suggests subfunctionalization of green-sensitive photopigments towards the perception of long wavelengths, like red and/or orange [77]. Intracelular measurements from the ventral portion of the eyes of the glaphyrid scarab Pygopleurus israelitus, which visits certain red Mediterranean flowers, revealed the existence of UV, green and red photoreceptors [78].
Authors compiled work from Cerado region, but it will be nice to present overall Brazil and Cerado for this group at least to show the graphical representation.
We have another ms. submitted where we show and discuss the graphical distribution of certain Annonaceae species within Brazil.
Line 292-325, either completely drops this vision part or revisit all the literature. What the author has mentioned here is not all correct. See below for some references as well but do a better literature search if you really want to include these sections. Also correct the whole manuscript if the color section is removed.
We maintained this topic (see comments above).
Italicized all scientific names.
Done.
Suggested additional references:
Sharkey, C.R., Fujimoto, M.S., Lord, N.P. et al. Overcoming the loss of blue sensitivity through opsin duplication in the largest animal group, beetles. Sci Rep 7, 8 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00061-7
Thanks. We included the above reference as number 77 in our Reference section and added another one as number 78 (see below).
Martínez-Harms, J.; Vorobyev, M.; Schron, J.; Shmida, A.; Keasar, T.; Homberg, U.; Schmeling, F.; Menzel, R. Evidence of red sensitive photoreceptors in Pygopleurus israelitus (Glaphyridae: Coleoptera) and its implications for beetle pollination in the southeast Mediterranean. J. Comp. Physiol. A. 2012, 198, 451–463.
Thanks for your help to improve our manuscript.
Reviewer 3 Report
The reviewed manuscript is an interesting summary of the biology of pollination of Annonaceae, which represent evolutionary ancient line of flowering plants. The authors skilfully introduce the reader to the issue, discussing contemporary views on the biology of pollination of primary angiospermae lines. I find the manuscript valuable.
Some suggestions:
- The names of genera and species in Latin should be written in italics. Please correct in whole text.
- Could authors show more photos of some pollinators of Annonaceae?
- Any nectar production in Annonaceae?
- "apomixis – an asexual breeding system with seed set through ovule cells "
please correct to "apomixis – an asexual breeding system with seed set without of meiosis or fertilisation"
Author Response
Review report 3
The reviewed manuscript is an interesting summary of the biology of pollination of Annonaceae, which represent evolutionary ancient line of flowering plants. The authors skilfully introduce the reader to the issue, discussing contemporary views on the biology of pollination of primary angiospermae lines. I find the manuscript valuable.
Comment appreciated.
The names of genera and species in Latin should be written in italics. Please correct in whole text.
Done.
Could authors show more photos of some pollinators of Annonaceae?
We have several forthcoming papers with more emphasis on cantharophily and with more specific photo documents on certain beetle behaviors. For reasons of originality we wanted to avoid duplicity of figs. in the review.
Any nectar production in Annonaceae?
No known nectar production in Annonaceae, and mentioned in the text complying to your suggestion.
"apomixis – an asexual breeding system with seed set through ovule cells "
please correct to "apomixis – an asexual breeding system with seed set without of meiosis or fertilisation"
Done.
Thanks for your help to improve our manuscript.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I thank the authors for having introduced the modifications required.
