Review Reports
by
- Carmine Marcone 1,*,
- Deividas Valiunas 2 and
- Ramachandran Sundararaj 3
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript, entitled „On some phytoplasma diseases of forest trees: un update”, submitted by the Italy, Lithuania, Bengaluru, India team is an interesting and very detailed review, the purpose of which was to investigate and systematically present literature sources concerning the occurrence of Phytoplasmas bacteria on Ulmus, Alnus, Fraxinus, Pinus, Santalum, Eucalyptus. These bacteria cause diseases of forest trees. So far phytoplasma diseases of forest trees have been less extensively studied than those affecting fruit trees. Research on the role of phytoplasmas as cause of diseases of forest trees has only in the last few years been intensified, after sensitive and specific detection methods, greatly based on PCR technology. The Authors of the study presented the symptoms of forest tree dieback caused by Phytoplasmas in an interesting way. These symptoms were often associated with disturbed physiological processes in the plant. They gave examples of the diseases on different continents, which is a very objective aspect of this work. I believe they have shown accuracy in their review as they have included a number of genetic links identified so far which they have shown in phylogenetic dendrograms. I am suggesting that further research is required to elucidate the role of phytoplasmas in asymptomatic trees and its relationships to the lack of symptom expression. I also propose extending the "Conclusions" and correcting the title of the work. Such studies may help to develop research techniques and procedures to help eliminate bacterial tree diseases.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment"
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Line 88:"in in Italy", one "in" should be deleted
Line 103-104, "This is the reason why...." may need to reorganise
Line 127 and 150, Italic for "Ca Phytoplasma ulmi"
Line 227, "1006"?
Line 252, "tested postive for phytoplasma"?
Line 295 and 296, "infested"?
Line 430, what do the authers mean "afer a few unconfirmed papers....."?
Figure 7, which is the healthy control? it seems two pics have been shown here. it need better explaination.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment"
Author Response File: Author Response.docx