Adaptability and Stability Analysis of Commercial Cultivars, Experimental Hybrids and Lines under Natural Fall Armyworm Infestation in Zimbabwe Using Different Stability Models
, Casper N. Kamutando 5, Bruce Mutari 6, Cosmos Magorokosho 3 and Maryke Labuschagne 4,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please see attached.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
The research is very interesting and can help corn breeders around the world to generate more resilient genotypes in dealing with this dangerous pest. The structure of the article is good, but some minor modifications are required. Table 1 shows the names and codes of genotypes and lines. I ask the authors to use a standardised representation of the names or codes of genotypes or lines throughout the article. For example, PAN53 (GC31) and CML338 (LC47) or vice versa GC31 (PAN53) and LC47 (CML338) due to this causing confusion and forcing the reader to return to Table 1.
Response: This has been corrected
Specific comments:
Line 155: Instead of "Further to that,…." I suggest "In addition,…."
Corrected
Figure 1: I suggest changing the coluors to make the numbers more noticeable.
Figure 2: I suggest increasing the font of the numbers in the charts.
Figure 3: I suggest changing the colours to make the numbers more noticeable.
Figure 4: I suggest changing the colours to make the numbers more noticeable.
We will have to re-analyze all the data to change the colors and font sizes, and given that we only have 3 days for corrections, we are not going be able to do this as it has major implications, so can we please leave them as is?
Lines 348-355: The text for Figure 4 is repeated. Please correct.
Line 572: Missing reference or excess ordinal number.
This was corrected.
Reviewer 2 Report
Some grammatical error can be improved and some citations are not in proper format.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Abstract: All the suggested corrections were incorporated.
Genotype code and name were given together throughout the text as suggested by the reviewer except in a few places, especially in the conclusions.
Line 155 – Adjusted as suggested.
Lines 348-355 – Seems the Figure Legend text is ok to me, I failed to pick the repetition?
Line 572 – The references were corrected, with the inclusion of a newly published paper which was listed as "unpublished" previously.
