Impact of Pot Farming on Plant-Parasitic Nematode Control

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript shows results on the effects of pot cultivation of ornamental plants distributed by nurseries, regarding the nematode community structure present in these plants. A secondary effect regarding exclusion and prevention of plant parasitic nematode increases in substrate or soil pots is discussed.

Results shown in the manuscript are original and interesting for the scientific community and for nursery technicians, regarding methods to avoid plant parasitic nematode infestations in nursery ornamental plants.

The manuscript is well written and can be published after answering and correcting some minor issues that are reported in the attahced pdf file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The manuscript shows results on the effects of pot cultivation of ornamental plants distributed by nurseries, regarding the nematode community structure present in these plants. A secondary effect regarding exclusion and prevention of plant parasitic nematode increases in substrate or soil pots is discussed.

Results shown in the manuscript are original and interesting for the scientific community and for nursery technicians, regarding methods to avoid plant parasitic nematode infestations in nursery ornamental plants.

The manuscript is well written and can be published after answering and correcting some minor issues that are reported in the attahced pdf file.

Done. We corrected the manuscript as suggested by reviewer in the attached PDF file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This MS is well-executed and offers useful insights into using pot culture to manage plant-parasitic nematodes in ornamental nurseries. The work exhibits excellent writing skills and provides a clear exposition of the approach used and the obtained findings. But some limitations are found like:

• The MS lacks information on the source of the plant materials used in the research. If the nematodes were not originally absent, this might complicate the findings.

• The study's scope was restricted to examining just two plant species, which reduces the applicability of the results to a broader context.

• The mechanisms behind the observed variations in plant-parasitic nematodes across different plant species were not investigated.

·  In the introduction: it would be beneficial to add a sentence or two about the economic impact of plant-parasitic nematodes on the nursery industry.

·  In the discussion:

o  Including a brief explanation of the potential ecological benefits of a richer free-living nematode community.

o  Discussing the limitations of pot cultivation for nematode control, such as the potential for re-infestation through irrigation water or infested tools.

 

o  Suggesting areas for future research, such as investigating the mechanisms behind the observed differences in plant-parasitic nematodes between plant species or exploring the effectiveness of combining pot cultivation with other control methods.

Author Response

This MS is well-executed and offers useful insights into using pot culture to manage plant-parasitic nematodes in ornamental nurseries. The work exhibits excellent writing skills and provides a clear exposition of the approach used and the obtained findings. But some limitations are found like:

• The MS lacks information on the source of the plant materials used in the research. If the nematodes were not originally absent, this might complicate the findings.

Done. We added the preparatory analysis in materials and methods.

• The study's scope was restricted to examining just two plant species, which reduces the applicability of the results to a broader context.

Done. We explained the issue in the first part of the discussion.

• The mechanisms behind the observed variations in plant-parasitic nematodes across different plant species were not investigated.

We confirm it. This issue was not explored. It could be an interesting subject for a future project.

• In the introduction: it would be beneficial to add a sentence or two about the economic impact of plant-parasitic nematodes on the nursery industry.

Done. We added two sentences in the first part of the introduction as suggested by the reviewer.

• In the discussion:
• Including a brief explanation of the potential ecological benefits of a richer free-living nematode community.
• We added some sentences in the following 4.1 paragraph: Effect of pot cultivation on artificial substrate soil nematode community structure.
• Discussing the limitations of pot cultivation for nematode control, such as the potential for re-infestation through irrigation water or infested tools.
• We added some sentences in the 4.1 paragraph. Effect of pot cultivation on artificial substrate soil nematode community structure.
• Suggesting areas for future research, such as investigating the mechanisms behind the observed differences in plant-parasitic nematodes between plant species or exploring the effectiveness of combining pot cultivation with other control methods

Done. We added a sentence in the conclusion section.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled "Impact of pot farming on plant-parasitic nematode control" scientifically evaluated the relationship between plants, soil properties and soil fauna. The author conducted a pot experiment using the nematodes as models. The results were interesting and of value, suggesting good potting management. Despite this, some parts of the manuscript need to be improved. Hope the below comments will be able to help to further improve this work.

 

Abstract

Lines 15-30 The logic of the abstract is not very clear. Please revise the abstract in the order of Background, Problem, Methods, Results, and Conclusion.

Lines 30-31 There doesn't seem to be a green part in the figure.

Lines 32-33 Keywords could be added more. Also, the first two keywords are somewhat repetitive.

 

Introduction

Lines 36-56 Despite the importance of the issues you raise, eliciting a paper from an EU regulation will leave you with fewer readers. Perhaps you can still ask a good scientific question and make a good case that your study site is relevant.

 

Materials and Methods

Lines 153-154 Here's what I don't quite understand. What are predator and prey respectively?

 

Results

Lines 185-186 It is desirable that the data here since the test is done, can be labelled with standard deviation or standard error. In addition, can all these insoluble substances be measured for conductivity and pH?

Lines 213-214 Please keep the number of decimal places in the same column consistent. The tables that follow have a similar problem.

Lines 219-220 Mark the meaning of the asterisks.

 

Discussion

Lines 321-323 It's puzzling why you would want to verify it again when it's known.

Lines 323-324 This should be presented in the methods.

 

Reference

Lines 432-493 Current reference formats are not consistent.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled "Impact of pot farming on plant-parasitic nematode control" scientifically evaluated the relationship between plants, soil properties and soil fauna. The author conducted a pot experiment using the nematodes as models. The results were interesting and of value, suggesting good potting management. Despite this, some parts of the manuscript need to be improved. Hope the below comments will be able to help to further improve this work.

Abstract

Lines 15-30 The logic of the abstract is not very clear. Please revise the abstract in the order of Background, Problem, Methods, Results, and Conclusion.

Done. We rearranged the abstract as suggested by the reviewer.

Lines 30-31 There doesn't seem to be a green part in the figure.

In the first histogram, we left the plant-parasitic nematodes (in green) in the legend to evidence their absence.

Lines 32-33 Keywords could be added more. Also, the first two keywords are somewhat repetitive.

Done. We added two new keywords.

Introduction

Lines 36-56 Despite the importance of the issues you raise, eliciting a paper from an EU regulation will leave you with fewer readers. Perhaps you can still ask a good scientific question and make a good case that your study site is relevant.

Done. We rearranged the discussion as suggested by the reviewer.

 

Materials and Methods

Lines 153-154 Here's what I don't quite understand. What are predator and prey respectively?

Done. We added the requested explanation in materials and methods.

Results

Lines 185-186 It is desirable that the data here since the test is done, can be labelled with standard deviation or standard error. In addition, can all these insoluble substances be measured for conductivity and pH?

Done. We added standard error. Moreover, the tests were conducted on mixtures with their specific characteristics thus we believe that the requested information could not add much to the results.

Lines 213-214 Please keep the number of decimal places in the same column consistent. The tables that follow have a similar problem.

Done.

Lines 219-220 Mark the meaning of the asterisks.

All requests were accomplished according to the reviewer’s suggestions. In the table 1 to avoid confusion “* “ was replaced in “¹”, because the asterisk had been already used to mark statistical significance.

Discussion

Lines 321-323 It's puzzling why you would want to verify it again when it's known.

Done. We rearranged the sentence.

Lines 323-324 This should be presented in the methods.

Done. We rearranged the sentence.

Reference

Lines 432-493 Current reference formats are not consistent.

Done. We revised the reference format. Moreover, we added some references as requested by the reviewers.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have appropriately addressed my comments. According to the current version, I have no further comments.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.