The Weather as an Indicator for Decision-Making Support Systems Regarding the Control of Cutworms in Beets and Cereal Leaf Beetles in Cereals and Their Adoption in Farming Practice

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors.

The work is interesting and supported in contents and time of study; however, the presentation of the results is not clear/didactic and should be well worked on. the conclusión adjusted to the results; ans the title too adjusted to results. (see sugestiosn inside of documen)

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your comments, which have been taken into account in the revision of the manuscript „A Scientific Basis for Decision-Making Support Systems Regarding the Control of Cutworms in Beets and Cereal Leaf Beetles in Cereals and Their Adoption in Farming Practice”

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic of the article is relevant and practically significant. This study adds to and generalizes the already existing publications regarding the choose of optimal methods of combating the species of pests in the specific conditions of agrocenosis. The data presented in the article are new. In the introduction, there is a high-quality analysis of the biology, the methods of monitoring and control of species of the Agrotis and Oulema genera.

However, there are some shortcomings to be corrected:

1) the abstract is not detailed enough; it will not attract potential readers; in the Summary, the Latin names of the studied pest species must be indicated;

2) the data in the Introduction are based on a very small number of sources; mentioning details of the biology of the species, their characteristics, requires indications of the literature containing those facts;

3) in Table 2, the sixth and eighth columns should be deleted; the numbers indicated in these columns should be inserted in the additional lower lines of the table or presented in the form of a separate table;

4) the same changes should be made in table 3;

5) in Tables 4 and 5 should contain no empty cells; the data in those tables should be formatted according to a different design, avoiding empty cells;

6) there is no need of referring twice to a source in one sentence (line 340-343).

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your comments, which have been taken into account in the revision of the manuscript „A Scientific Basis for Decision-Making Support Systems Regarding the Control of Cutworms in Beets and Cereal Leaf Beetles in Cereals and Their Adoption in Farming Practice”

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This research is dealing with the problem of having quality data to make proper decisions regarding an effective pest control in crops. Although the scope is really important, I feel the authors are not reaching the whole potential of the research.

I am a little confused about the approach for this paper. I am not sure if this is a new proposal for an application or for a method, or a compilation of years of research done by the Institute. This should be completely clear, starting with the introduction, which should not be divided into subsections and should state which is the problem you are trying to solve (including something about the crops you are facing), a brief framework for other DDS that already exist, the lack of knowledge you are trying to fulfill and the aims of the paper, and this should be supported by literature. There is too much unnecessary information about the morphology and complete life cycle of the pests or about some monitoring/control methods, but there is no information about which country are you in and how important are those crops for that country, for instance.

The material and methods section is also confused. Sometimes it seems you are giving some advice about the timing, sometimes it seems you are showing some results, and sometimes you are describing how you took those data.

And as said for introduction, the discussion section should be based and supported by literature, but only a few references are found. Many of the statements in this section (e.g., “The timing of chemical treatments does more for effective disease and pest control than the choice of a dose or active ingredient in the control agent”, lines 374-376) need a reference.

In summary, the authors should be clear on the aim of the paper and structure the information accordingly, and follow the standards of a scientific paper.

Other minor comments are next:

The title is too long and odd to read. I suggest instead of be so specific about the pest species just say something like “main pest species in beets and cereal”.

Please write “spp.” without italics.

Author Response

Dear EditorWe are sending a revised manuscript as suggested by the reviewers. For review 3 - there is a comment "There is too much unnecessary information about the morphology and complete life cycle of the pests.....".Advisory systems are primarily based on analysis of the rate of development of the pest(disease) under given/specific meteorological conditions. In view of this, we felt it would be reasonable to include information on pest biology in the paper. Also, information on monitoring methods (tools) as well as on pest control seemed relevant - especially in view of the requirements of integrated pest management, where there is a requirement to monitor a plantation before deciding on a chemical treatment.

If you consider that this section should however be shortened - we will of course follow your suggestionIn the case of the title - reviewer 1 - suggested a different title (included in the revised manuscript), reviewer 3 suggested shortening the title.In view of the above, we also suggest a second title (in addition to the one in the revised manuscript) for the: „Scientific basis, the background of the decision support system for the control of cutworms in beets and cereal leaf beetles in cereals”.

Kind regards

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.docx