Next Article in Journal
Phenotypic and Chemotypic Relations among Local Andrographis paniculata (Burm. f.) Wall Landrace Collection
Next Article in Special Issue
Biological Control of Downy Mildew and Yield Enhancement of Cucumber Plants by Trichoderma harzianum and Bacillus subtilis (Ehrenberg) under Greenhouse Conditions
Previous Article in Journal
Oriental Strawberry Metabolites: LC–MS Profiling, Antioxidant Potential, and Postharvest Changes of Fragaria orientalis Fruits
Previous Article in Special Issue
Assessing the Impact of Variety, Irrigation, and Plant Distance on Predatory and Phytophagous Insects in Chili
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

A Comparison of IPM and Organic Farming Systems Based on the Efficiency of Oophagous Predation on the Olive Moth (Prays oleae Bernard) in Olive Groves of Southern Iberia

Horticulturae 2022, 8(10), 977; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8100977
by José Alfonso Gómez-Guzmán 1, José M. Herrera 2,3, Vanesa Rivera 2, Sílvia Barreiro 2, José Muñoz-Rojas 2,4, Roberto García-Ruiz 1 and Ramón González-Ruiz 1,*
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Horticulturae 2022, 8(10), 977; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8100977
Submission received: 17 September 2022 / Revised: 18 October 2022 / Accepted: 18 October 2022 / Published: 21 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Integrated Pest Management in Horticulture)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

The manuscript is very interesting and the topic is very current in the context of sustainable olive grove keeping. The authors have successfully identified the challenges involved in olive growing and substantiated them with references. I suggest that the manuscript be accepted for publication, with some minor changes in key words, methodology and references:

 

 

Proposed changes in specific lines:

Line:

32 Key words: List in alphabetical order; leave out “Prays oleae” since it is already mentioned in the title

112 Source

130 Name the exact phonological growth stage of the olive tree (G) and the reference (Colbrant, P., Fabre, P. (1972) Stadesreperes de l’olivier. Fiche serv. Prot. Veg. Comite technique de l’olivier).

or according to the BBCH scale: 67 – 69? (Sanz-Cortés F., Martínez-Calvo J., Badenes M. L., Bleiholder H., Hack, H., Llácer G., Meier U. (2002). Phenological growth stages of olive trees (Olea europaea L.). Annals of Applied Biology 140 (2): 151-157. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7348.2002.tb00167.x)

142 Tables 1 and 2 can be combined into a single table. The variety name should be written in single quote marks, e.g. ‘Picual’.

167 Provide a source for the phonological growth stage

163 Was the population of P. olea monitored?

176 Name the model of the stereo microscope used

227 Provide a reference for the statistics software

234 It is unclear whether a return test was used to determine the level of statistical significance of the results (*,**  and ***), if yes, specify which one

References:

Add dates of accessing online sources, e.g. in line 468

451 add the page number, pp. 360

485 add the page number and the publisher

 

 

Author Response

the answer in attached document

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I  have suggested numerous changes in an attempt to improve the English used. My major concern is that you use the term IPM without explaining how it is being applied in the orchards. In the Table you do mention chemicals that are used, so how does the application differ from full scale chemical control? Do IPM farmers use less chemicals or ones that are soft on the lacewings. A few sentences are necessary to explain in what sense the control measures used can be called IPM.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

the answer in attached document

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop