PONE-D-21-33487Refuge distributions and landscape connectivity affect host-parasitoid dynamics: motivations for biological control in agroecosystemsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. D. Fernandes,

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 address carefully all the points raised by the reviewers. In particular, please highlight the novelty of your model compared to others and make a more explicit connection to realistic ecological scenarios.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 23 2022 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'. Please use red font color in all the changes in your manuscript, to facilitate the review (instead of track changes using word) 
• 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: https://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,

Alejandro Carlos Costamagna, Ph.D.

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

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

I only have a couple of minor comments. Figure 2-3: are SE present but very small? Please confirm. Line 338: replace “Parasitoids” by “Parasitoid”.

[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: I Don't Know

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: I definitely see the relevance of thinking of different spatial scales of landscape, and scales of movement influencing host-parasitoid interactions, their abundances and dynamics. But I don’t see how the scales presented here correspond to agricultural landscapes. Figure 1 shows small scale areas with refuge imbedded in it (individual farms), connected together on a larger in ring and star configurations. What does the area between the farms represent? Why that configuration? What is the difference between that and “non-crop” habitat which is called refuge when it is in the farm?

Since there are more important generalist predators than parasitoids in agricultural systems, it may make sense to change the language in the ms to be about predator-prey rather then host-parasitoid dynamics.

I am not qualified to evaluate the novelty of the model, but I will note that it wasn’t discussed in relation to other spatial host-parasitoid dynamics models. Thus maybe it is difficult to assess the contribution of this particular model and set of simulations. Perhaps analysis of local and regional scales simultaneously is novel, but there has been significant modeling of the two scales separately. The value of this study would be increased by placing it more the context of other work.

Overall, I found the introduction and abstract unclear, but the results and discussion pretty clear. Though the discussion was clear in could benefit from more reference to related work from the literature.

Specific comments:

Abstract:

-Consider leaving out the second sentence

-What do you mean by non-crop habitat? Do the hosts not inhabit it? Later I see what you mean, but in the abstract it is confusing.

-The abstract will be more interesting with specific outcomes of the study stated, so what are some “responses of host suppression”? And, how does parasitoid dispersal range interact with landscape structure to affect host population variables?

Line 15-16: If you are sticking with the host-parasitoid set up rather than predator-prey, consider introducing the work in the context of other spatial models of host-parasitoid dynamics such as C. Briggs, W. Murdoch, J. vandermeer, P. Amarasekare, Susan Harrison

Line 20, references 16 and 17: Again, these don't seem like specific references for this idea.

Line 23 references: These references are more about predators than parasitoids.

Line 30: missing the word "viable"?

Line 38: “Guarantee” sounds pretty absolute. How about facilitate? or promote?

Line 41: Connectivity is defined by different people in different ways. Sometimes connectivity is a function of the distribution of the habitat and the dispersal ability of the species, so it isn't independent of dispersal.

Line 43: Is two distinct scales a general pattern? I don't quite see it. I can imagine movement within a patch that isn't really dispersal, and then dispersal, that could be at a range of scales, but not two distinct ones. Am I missing something?

Line 47: Define what you mean by non-crop. How is that related to the term “refuge” as you use it?

Line 51: What are the host variables?

Line 53: What is connectivity in this case, and the dynamics of which species? And the spatial dynamics or population growth rate dynamics?

Line 58-59: I didn’t get from the introduction how these two discrete scales correspond to in real landscapes.

Line 61-63: This should be said earlier. Still though, I don't see how this is two scales. Is there refuge or crop or something else between farms?

Line 95: Density dependence of what?

Line 162-163: Why a star and a ring?

Line 175-176: Explain the Parameters briefly so that the reader understands generally without looking at another paper.

Line 186: What are these traits and how were they chosen?

Reviewer #2: This contribution explores the dynamics of host-parasitoid systems in connected patches based on different topologies. I think the paper is well written and the topic of spatial effects in quite pertinent to these systems. However, some discussion around these points is missing in the paper:

1) The concept of refuge has to be motivated and discussed. Generally, refuges imply a host refuges where parasitoids are unable to attack hosts, but I found this concept of “parasitoid refuge” confusing. What is the motivation for a parasitoid refuge and how is that different from host refuge?

2) Connected to the earlier point, host refuges are critical to stabilize host-parasitoid systems So the authors should include them in the simulations to see how that the overall dynamics and results are altered.

3) The authors mention dynamics but there no time-traces of population densities over time. It will be good include these to see what the actual dynamics looks like

4) The Nicholson Bailey models is unstable resulting in diverging oscillations. Generally, I found a lot of this context on stability missing in the entire papers. I could not find the stability analysis for these systems to see if they are indeed stable or not. Can the authors present this analysis?

5) This recent paper came up in my search on spatial effect and seems relevant to this study. It will be good discuss and compare

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0025556420300869

**********

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.

PONE-D-21-33487R1Refuge distributions and landscape connectivity affect host-parasitoid dynamics: motivations for biological control in agroecosystemsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. D. Fernandes,

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.

==============================

The authors have answered satisfactorily all the questions raised by the reviewers and the editor in this new version. The only minor change I request is to modify a sentence that currently does not make sense grammatically:

L 101-102: However, treating refuges as more general spatial features that allow increased survival of individuals (in this case, parasitoids), we use this term henceforth.

Please note also that the connection with the use of ‘refuge’ is lost, I think, by the previous sentence. Once you change this sentence, please resubmit the new version.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 07 2022 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: https://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,

Alejandro Carlos Costamagna, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

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

Reviewers' comments:

[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.

Refuge distributions and landscape connectivity affect host-parasitoid dynamics: motivations for biological control in agroecosystems

PONE-D-21-33487R2

Dear Dr. D. Fernandes,

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,

Alejandro Carlos Costamagna, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: