Diversity of the Endemic Madagascan Dung Beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Scarabaeinae): New Records from Six Protected Areas
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is generally clear, concise and well-articulated. The content is scientifically sound and rather important in the context of global and regional biodiversity. I have suggested some further clarifications within the text and, in particular, some comparisons with the diversity of dung beetles from other regions of the World, in order to make this study more globally relevant. See also comments in the PDF file using Sticky Notes.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
The English is generally adequate, but needs some minor polishing. I have tried to rectify some of the main omissions and suggested amendments and corrections throughout the text, but a more comprehensive review of the language may still be required.
Author Response
The paper is generally clear, concise and well-articulated. The content is scientifically sound and rather important in the context of global and regional biodiversity. I have suggested some further clarifications within the text and, in particular, some comparisons with the diversity of dung beetles from other regions of the World, in order to make this study more globally relevant. See also comments in the PDF file using Sticky Notes.
peer-review-31132122.v1.pdf
Thank you for your opinion. We carefully checked your comments in the pdf-file and addressed all of them. We also added a short comparison of Madagascar fauna with others in “discussion” part. This question is somewhat outside the scope of our present contribution, but more information can be found in the cited references.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The English is generally adequate, but needs some minor polishing. I have tried to rectify some of the main omissions and suggested amendments and corrections throughout the text, but a more comprehensive review of the language may still be required.
Thank you for your appreciation of our English and polishing the text. All corrections are accepted.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Photos, maps and habitat photos are fine and raise attention :)
You investigated six protected areas, but at the end of the intro you write that five areas have been studied. Please check
A full species name include Author AND Year of description, please add year to the species names throughout the paper
table 3 is superfluous, because Fig 4 is better
Fig 4 should be improved: please add ecological information, e.g. habitat types
Large parts of the discussion (2nd and 3rd section) should be transferred to results section to describe your findings in the text. I miss a discussion on the differences in species composition between different habitats. Most species are living in the forests there and deforestation is the major cause for extinction of dung beetles (Hanski et al. 2007, Biol Lett). How do your results fit to this discussion? Please give also a statement on the potential pattern of seasonality that might help to interpret your data. I guess that the limited sampling (only Feb) discovered only a small part of the species present at each site.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
