Assessment of the Knowledge, Perceptions, and Reactions towards the African Apefly (Spalgis lemolea lemolea) in Tanzania

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I found the paper very interesting; it provides important information that might potentially help to clear widespread misconceptions about an insect that seems to hold promise as a biocontrol agent.  This is valuable!  

However, the overall presentation of the paper could be improved significantly. There are numerous grammatical and typographical errors throughout the manuscript, which could have easily been corrected with a more careful proof reading and reading other published work, to see how information is presented.  For example, the term 'apefly' is used throughout the manuscript, to denote the insect itself, its pupae, its larvae, experimental treatments containing the pulverized insects, etc. This has to be made consistent with acceptable formats in scientific journals.  A number of technical errors (e.g., in spellings of scientific names) were also seen, which is really not acceptable in a scientific paper. 

I thought the study was fairly straightforward, and the results have been explained suitably.  

I recommend acceptance contingent to correction of errors pointed out in the attached manuscript and subsequent review.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Revewer 1,

Thank you so much for the comments that you provided to us. We have adressed them and please fing the attached report'

 

Kindly,

Corresponding author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors:

This is a very interesting research topic. The manuscript could be improved by editing the text throughout. Here are several examples below.

Line 3 - apefly rather than Apefly?

Line 16 - signs of toxicity

Line 19 - organs were done.

Lines 30-32: Please condense the first two sentences into one. Maybe use: "Insects are a diverse and biologically successful group of animals on Earth [1,2]." "Insects can be broadly categorized as pests and beneficial species."

Lines 42-44 - Please revise to increase clarity. Maybe "... devote their professional lives to the study of insects. Some non-entomologists perceive insects as potentially dangerous and consequently have an unreasonable fear of them, i.e., entomophobia."

Line 51-52 - The pupal stage of apefly possesses a unique phenotypic feature; they resemble the face of a monkey, hence the name apefly. 

Line 53-54 - to consume larger quantities 

Line 55 - can also be a useful biological control agent

Line 58 - reactions toward apefly 

Line 64 - reactions toward apefly and to conduct toxicity tests...

Line 95 - Collection and preparation of apefly

Line 105 - Figure 2. (a) Apefly pupa, (b) grinding of apefly pupa, (c) apefly powder, and (d) a mouse feeding on 100% apefly powder.

Line 113 - at the end of 24 hr, as described by ...

Line 124 - A total of 9 healthy … (Please delete Acute toxicity tests,)

Line 140 - Sub-acute toxicity tests were carried out ... 

Line 148 - Hematological and biochemical examinations

Line 210 - This is not mentioned in the Statistical Analysis section. Please add.

Table 3 - I am not sure if the appropriate statistics are used in this table. Please check.

Lines 369, 370, 372, 373, 374, 375, 380, 421, 423, and 425 - Please italicize the scientific names. 

Note: Scientific names are usually proceeded by the authority name after its first mention in the text of a manuscript. Please check to see if this journal requires this or not, and follow accordingly.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

We are grateful for the comments you provided. We have resolved them and please find the attached report,

Kindly,

Corresponding Author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx