Impact of Fungicide Application Timing Based on Soybean Rust Prediction Model on Application Technology and Disease Control
, Flávio Nunes da Silva 1, Raphael Mereb Negrisoli 1, Lucas da Silva Lopes 1, Francisco de Sales Souza Júnior 1, Bianca Rezende de Freitas 2, Edivaldo Domingues Velini 1 and Carlos Gilberto Raetano 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript by Mereb Negrisoli et al., titled "Impact of fungicide application timing based on soybean rust prediction modelo on aplication technology and disease control" provides positive results in the applicability of prediction model as threshold for disease control decision-making, and to identify the effect of different application timings on SBR control as well as on the spraying technology.
Authors should improve the grammar, spelling, punctuation, and overall English of the manuscript. The abbreviations should be explained in full during the first mention.
Describes two experimental trials in a 2 x 4 factorial scheme: 2 cultivars (susceptible and partially resistant to SBR); and four application timings (conventional chemical control at a calendarized system basis; based on prediction model; at the appearance of the first visible symptoms; and control without fungicide application). Overall, the manuscript is clear and easy to follow. The introduction is clear and well written. The design is simple and coherent with the objectives. It would be useful to include a more detailed section on the f fungal structures and symptoms than appears to be what this research is showing? The results read well and present an accurate reflection of the data. ANOVA (disease symptoms) of such data may not be appropriate. The section on statistical analysis needs revision: how could ANOVA be used to evaluating the dispersion? Indeed, for a categorical variable, arithmetic means may not have much meaning. Consider use non-parametric methods to compare the means. The tables are very clear and easy to interpret.
Authors should pay more attention to the reference section. Many formatting mistakes have been observed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for authors:
Please provide the study area map.
Please include the high-resolution figures.
Which spectroscopy have you used? Imaging or non-imaging?
Please incorporate the spectral profiles and NDVI maps.
Fig 14: What is the value range of NDVI? -1 to +1? or 0 to 2?
Please provide the abbreviation of NDVI.
How did you validate your results?
The figure's legends are not clear: please explain in detail.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
