Tick Diversity and Distribution of Hard (Ixodidae) Cattle Ticks in South Africa

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The information in this manuscript has regional importance; however, its impact is of global interest.

This work is well written, and the importance of this type of study is understood in regions where diseases transmitted by ticks to animals and humans themselves have health and economic repercussions. The following observations are made to the authors to be addressed.

1) the quality of the tick figures can be improved and unified since, in some photos, the photo is of good quality, and in others, it is not. It is favorable to present male and female specimens to demonstrate their differences.

2) On line 91, if it is the first time the name of the species is mentioned, it must be written in full.

3) unfortunately, there is no data on the economic impact of TBD in South Africa, which is why the title of point 4 should be changed, and perhaps present this lack of information as a need or a perspective that must be addressed urgently by the authorities.

4) Line 344 ticks are selected as resistant to acaricides instead of they develop resistance.

5) verify the spelling of the names of the species; is it correct, that is, R. microplus or Rh. microplus, and so with the rest of the species.

6) line 377, vaccines without a capital letter.

7) Line 407, correct the name of the legume.

8) an excellent point to consider in the conclusions is the fact that the molecular identification of ticks is a real alternative to the visual identity that is traditionally used.

Author Response

Please find attached the response to the reviewers

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

At first glance, the title suggests novel and interesting research on South African ticks. A review of the text, however, shows the need for many corrections. The title doesn’t adequately reflect the subject of the study – there is nothing about genetic structure of the ticks. The prevalence and biology of selected tick species are described only, with addition of tick control. Abstract – its content absolutely does not coincide with the content of the manuscript.

What was the key to selecting the tick species described? How many species of ticks, including those omitted, inhabit this region and can be found on cattle? Some species names should be corrected. In accordance with the rules of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, authors' names are given in parentheses for:

Amblyomma variegatum (Fabricius, 1794); Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) annulatus (Say, 1821); Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) geigyi (Aeschliman & Morel, 1965); Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus (Canestrini, 1888).

Chapter Conclusion – there are no conclusion from the text.

 Moreover, the paper can be improved if a number of points (see below) are satisfactorily addressed before being accepted for its publication in Microbiology Open.

14 (and in other places follow) - ticks transmit pathogens - not diseases.

31 – which Protozoa? This is great group of unicellular organisms.

55 – Boophilus – are included to the genus Rhipicephalus; moreover, Authors acknowledge this fact and mention it further.

100 – in my opinion, the genera names should be typed in italic in chapter names too (see also: 136,  

102 – Nava and Guglielmone [8]

158 – 159 – Hy. truncatum should be typed using italic. See also other parts of manuscript.

166 – 167 – I not agree, that H. truncatum and H. rufipes are impossible to distinguish. One of the morphological features is scutum densely and uniformly covered by punctation in H. rufipes, lightly and unevenly in H. truncatum.

171 – ticks are found in the soil ??? – maybe on the ground.

225 – scutum (…) have fine hair on the surfaces… In the life sciences, hair is the horny formation made by the skin of vertebrates. In the case of ticks, there are setae on the surface of the scutum.

234 – adult ticks

245-246 - Rh. (Boophilus) microplus adults are bigger and slightly redder in color than Rh. (Boophilus) decoloratus adults, and are practically identical - this sentence contradicts itself.

251 – “About 20 centuries ago, this species was recorded” – centuries or decades?

285 – salivary carry toxins – I suggest that salivary contains toxins

294 - males may be attached to females occasionally – this fact concerns many more Ixodes ticks.

503 - Adult females carry toxins in their saliva – carry? I suggest “The saliva of adult females contain toxins…

Figure 5, 6– I suggest posting a picture of the not engorged tick specimen; in engorged females the species-specific features are not visible.

Based on the above I do not support the publication in its current form.

Author Response

Please see attached response to the reviewer 2

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors took into account most of the reviewers' comments. Unfortunately, the manuscript still needs revision. The title is not adequate to the content - in the content of the manuscript the genetic population of ticks is not discussed. Then, the chapters on tick control are basically redundant - they can be shortened to a few sentences in the discussion to justify the importance of the research and the results obtained. I also have the impression that the language still needs to be corrected by a native speaker.

Author Response

Thanks for your kind remarks and attached are the files for your attention.

Regards

N Nyangiwe

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf