Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJune 18, 2021
Decision Letter - Adnan Noor Shah, Editor

PONE-D-21-18182

Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ali,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 27 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Adnan Noor Shah, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

4. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: 

“N/A”

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

 This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The article entitled "Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions" describes the diet impacts on biological parameters of destructive pest of cotton.The overall composition of the manuscript is good, is written in a clear and understanding manner with a very nice introduction to the topic. All used procedures are correct. The paper is scientifically and methodologically accurate, and the conclusions drawn are convincing. The linguistic style is sufficient for publication and the reference section is adequate. This manuscript will find the interest of many readers and researcher of entomology. However, there are few gaps still remains. In my opinion, these gaps must remove before publications.

The manuscript can be accepted after the following issues are addressed.

Minor comments:

Introduction

Line 17, suggested to write as There are limited studies were published to focused

Line 20, replace influence to impacts

Line 31, write as parameters were significantly varient across all treatment

Line 33, must removed some insights into

Line39, correct grammar and sentences

Line 40, write as, more than 100 countries with an estimated

Line 41, replace percent with % an same as in the Line 42

Line 43, write technical name of pink bollworm and whole manuscript as well

Line 46, correct sentence

Line 50, suggested to write white greenish eggs or bunch of 15 or 20 eggs that changes the color

Reference in text section should be changes with latest reference

Line 91-93, suggested to write The purpose of this study was to determine the impacts of different diet composition on developmental, larval and pupal weight of pink bollworm by separately rearing their larvae in reared cups to strictly avoid to any contaminations

Line 96, Write Insect collections

Line 136, remove space

Line 140. Write as and given in table 2

Line 147, remove space

Line 168, remove repetitions

Line 180, remove space

Lin 200-2001, remove space

In the discussion section must include latest reference

Line 307, replace facilitate

The sequence, heading, sub heading of manuscript should be according to journal requirements

Reviewer #2: Reviewer comments

Article title: Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions

Editor in Chief

Thank you for providing me with an opportunity to review the article for your prestigious journal, PLOS One. I have reviewed the article and here are my comments/suggestion for the authors.

Comments for authors

Abstract

1. Line # 15. “Asia and preferably invade cotton crop, Gossypium hirsutum (L.)”, rephrase as “Asia and preferably invade cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) crop.

2. Line # 16. put comma after commercially.

3. Line # 18-19. G. hirsutum rearing ------------ conditions, rearing what? Make correction.

4. There are few grammatical and punctuation mistakes author need to carefully revise this section.

5. Introduction/Background

1. Cotton, Gossypium hirsutum (L.) change this to Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

2. Line # 38 & 40. Cotton is grown in more ----- employment needs, make this sentence grammatically correct.

3. Line # 51-59, require substantial rephrasing, the sentence/s are too long, and contain grammatical errors. Further, too many outdated citations.

4. There are several overlapping information in this section, authors are advised to remove such information.

5. Remove all outdated references and keep the latest.

Material and Methods

Authors described very detailed MM section.

Results

1. Results are described without heading, make sub-headings and describe information under those sub-headings.

Discussion

1. The discussion need to revised make it more focused based on results.

2. Remove the overlapping information/statements.

References

1. Update the reference section with latest findings keep only those old reference which are utmost important.

Comments for Editor

1. Article can be accepted after suggested modifications.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

Dated. 2021-08-24

Professor Dr. Adnan Noor Shah

PLOS ONE

Dear Subject Editor,

Subject: Resubmission of our revised manuscript titled “Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions (PONE-D-21-18182).

With this cover letter, we would like to resubmit the revised manuscript (PONE-D-21-18182) for the publication in PLOS ONE. We would also like to thank the editors and reviewers for the careful and constructive reviews and we honestly feel that reviewer’s insightful suggestions helped us to improve the manuscript profoundly. All the revisions can be easily identified from highlights made in the revised manuscript. Once again thanks for your co-operation and valuable comments and suggestion.

We submitted the revised manuscript file with all suggested corrections highlighted green in the main file. Furthermore, Reviewer comments was addressed point-by-point with reference to revised page and line numbers in the rebuttal letter and main file.

Kind regards.

Dr. Habib Ali

Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, Rahim Yar Khan, Pakistan Telephone number: +923106084708; Email: habib_ali1417@yahoo.com

Based on the comments of the reviewers, we have made changes to the manuscript and highlighted them in green for reviewer whose details are mentioned bellow:

Respond to the evaluation as suggested by the Editors & reviewers

Response to Reviewer # 1:

Dear reviewer, we are grateful to you for your comments and suggestions for the improvement of the article. We have tried our best to revise the manuscript in light of your comments.

Reviewer #1:

The article entitled "Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions" describes the diet impacts on biological parameters of destructive pest of cotton.The overall composition of the manuscript is good, is written in a clear and understanding manner with a very nice introduction to the topic. All used procedures are correct. The paper is scientifically and methodologically accurate, and the conclusions drawn are convincing. The linguistic style is sufficient for publication and the reference section is adequate. This manuscript will find the interest of many readers and researcher of entomology. However, there are few gaps still remains. In my opinion, these gaps must remove before publications.

The manuscript can be accepted after the following issues are addressed.

Minor comments:

Introduction

Line 17, suggested to write as There are limited studies were published to focused

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 43)

Line 20, replace influence to impacts

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 46)

Line 31, write as parameters were significantly varient across all treatment

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 57)

Line 33, must removed some insights into

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 58)

Line39, correct grammar and sentences

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 65)

Line 40, write as, more than 100 countries with an estimated

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 66)

Line 41, replace percent with % an same as in the Line 42

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 67-68)

Line 43, write technical name of pink bollworm and whole manuscript as well

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 69-71)

Line 46, correct sentence

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 76)

Line 50, suggested to write white greenish eggs or bunch of 15 or 20 eggs that changes the color

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 76)

Reference in text section should be changes with latest reference

Rebuttal: Correction has been made in the whole manuscript

Line 91-93, suggested to write The purpose of this study was to determine the impacts of different diet composition on developmental, larval and pupal weight of pink bollworm by separately rearing their larvae in reared cups to strictly avoid to any contaminations

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 117-119)

Line 96, Write Insect collections

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 122)

Line 136, remove space

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 124)

Line 140. Write as and given in table 2

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 166)

Line 147, remove space

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 175)

Line 168, remove repetitions

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 191)

Line 180, remove space

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 197)

Lin 200-2001, remove space

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 221)

In the discussion section must include latest reference

Rebuttal: Correction has been made

Line 307, replace facilitate

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 192)

The sequence, heading, sub heading of manuscript should be according to journal requirements

Rebuttal: Correction has been made according to the journal requirement

Response to Reviewer # 2

Article title: Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions

Editor in Chief

Thank you for providing me with an opportunity to review the article for your prestigious journal, PLOS One. I have reviewed the article and here are my comments/suggestion for the authors.

Rebuttal: Dear reviewer, we are grateful to you for your comments and suggestions for the improvement of the article. We have tried our best to revise the manuscript in light of your comments.

Comments for authors

Abstract

1. The manuscript can be accepted after the following issues are addressed.

Minor comments:

Line # 15. “Asia and preferably invade cotton crop, Gossypium hirsutum (L.)”, rephrase as “Asia and preferably invade cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) crop.

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 41)

2. Line # 16. put comma after commercially.

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 42)

3. Line # 18-19. G. hirsutum rearing ------------ conditions, rearing what? Make correction.

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 45)

4. There are few grammatical and punctuation mistakes author need to carefully revise this section.

Rebuttal: All grammatical error and mistakes has been removed in the whole manuscript

5. Introduction/Background

1. Cotton, Gossypium hirsutum (L.) change this to Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Rebuttal: Correction has been made

2. Line # 38 & 40. Cotton is grown in more ----- employment needs, make this sentence grammatically correct.

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 66)

3. Line # 51-59, require substantial rephrasing, the sentence/s are too long, and contain grammatical errors. Further, too many outdated citations.

Rebuttal: Correction has been made (Line number 78)

4. There are several overlapping information in this section, authors are advised to remove such information.

Rebuttal: All overlapped material has been removed

5. Remove all outdated references and keep the latest.

Rebuttal: latest reference has been added in the whole manuscript

Material and Methods

Authors described very detailed MM section.

Rebuttal: Detailed information has been added in the MM section

Results

1. Results are described without heading, make sub-headings and describe information under those sub-headings.

Rebuttal: Heading, sub heading has been added in the Result section

Discussion

1. The discussion need to revised make it more focused based on results.

Rebuttal: Discussion has been revised according to the requirement

2. Remove the overlapping information/statements.

Rebuttal: All overlapped material has been removed in the whole manuscript

References

1. Update the reference section with latest findings keep only those old reference which are utmost important.

Rebuttal: latest reference has been added in the whole manuscript

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Adnan Noor Shah, Editor

Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions

PONE-D-21-18182R1

Dear Dr. Ali,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Adnan Noor Shah, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Adnan Noor Shah, Editor

PONE-D-21-18182R1

Diet impacts on the biological aspects of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) under controlled laboratory conditions

Dear Dr. Ali:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Adnan Noor Shah

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .