Extreme Temperature Switches Eliminate Root-Knot Nematodes: A Greenhouse Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript entitled “Extreme temperature switches eliminate root knot nematode: a greenhouse study” addresses a problematic issue in greenhouse crops. The authors assessed the thermic shocks for controlling nematodes that damage the root of the plants. Although the idea is not completely new for science and farmers, the approach is innovative and the benefits, as described in the study, could be an advantage to both farmers and consumers.
The manuscript is mostly well-written and properly structured. Also, I consider that the experiments were designed accordingly to the objective of the study, and the results even presented partially in a speculative manner, were correctly interpreted. Discussions are fairly and honestly.
However, there are still some things to be clarified and improvements to make mainly to the material and methods section.
My observations are:
- line 91-92- unfinished sentence
- the heading title 2.3 need to be changed. Also, the entire quantitative evaluation of nematodes must be rewritten because is not very clear and the description of the method is confusing;
- sections 2.5 and 2.6 must be improved by adding supplementary details to the methodology; enumerating equipment and kits is not enough;
- section 2.8 is not enough detailed; authors should revise the description of statistical analyses;
- line 150 – diurnal temperature;
- I consider the titles of sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 inappropriate; these should be not speculative but rather concise and informative;
- the same observation for tables 7 and 8.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Please, see an enclosed document.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comment is in enclosed file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks again for your warm advices! We have revised the manuscript following our guidence. See line 115-116.
