PONE-D-22-02509Do bromeliads affect the arboreal ant communities on orange trees in northwestern Costa Rica?PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Diane S Srivastava

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 Jun 09 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,

Kleber Del-Claro, 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. Please include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met.  Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

“This project was supported by NSERC Discovery Grants to DSS and MAS, and all work was performed under a MINAE research permit. This is a publication of the Bromeliad Working Group.”

We note that you have provided additional information within the Acknowledgements Section that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. Please note that funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“B.R-K. was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada - NSERC (http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca) Undergraduate Student Research Award (#527311), D.S.S and M.A.S. were supported by NSERC Discovery Grants. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well.

5. 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.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Dear Authors, I have revised your article following reviewer 1, considering the decline in peer review and time we need an answer for you. I agree with all the comments fo the reviewer that is an expert in this particular research field. I ask you to consider all of the suggestions and comments made for the reviewer. I personally liked a lot your study, recently we published a similar one* (will help you to answer the comment of L333 - reviewer 1) and others in the same systems in the last years. The arboreal ant community associated to bromelieads per se is an amazing system with the outcomes on agricultural systems, still more interesting. I studied Camponotus senex almost two decades ago in Brazil, that is also an ant with enormous potential to biological control in mangos plantation.

I am waiting for the new version of your paper. All the best,

Kleber

*Jr Pacheco, P.S.M. and Del-Claro, K. (2018), Pseudomyrmex concolor Smith (Formicidae: Pseudomyrmecinae) as induced biotic defence for host plant Tachigali myrmecophila Ducke (Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae). Ecol Entomol, 43: 782-793. https://doi.org/10.1111/een.12665

[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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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 manuscript “Do bromeliads affect the arboreal ant communities on orange trees in northwestern Costa Rica?” considers the effects of bromeliads on arboreal ant communities in orange crops. Despite sharing part of the data with the following manuscript (“Hammill, et al. 2014. Bromeliad‐associated reductions in host herbivory: do epiphytic bromeliads act as commensalists or mutualists?. Biotropica, 46(1), 78-82”), this study has a different approach being independent from the above. Therefore, this manuscript presents an original idea filling a gap that has arisen. The “Introduction” is well written and the “Methods” are clear but some sampling information is necessary. The statistical analysis sounds appropriate. My main concern is that the authors do not explore the fact that there are species that establish intimate relationships with bromeliads (Who are these species?) and may have great potential in biological control (L13-15). See Anjos et al. (2021) Ants affect citrus pests and their natural enemies in contrasting ways. Biological Control. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2021.104611. These authors explore the potential of some ant species for biological control in citrus crops. I would like to see this issue further discussed in the “Discussion” section. Overall, I think the study is sound and I have only some minor comments.

Minor comments:

L20-21: See Rosumek et al. (2009). Ants on plants: a meta-analysis of the role of ants as plant biotic defenses. Oecologia, 160(3), 537-549.

L21-22: Ants also establish important relationships with some caterpillar species (Lycaenidae). Cushman et al. (1994). Assessing benefits to both participants in a lycaenid‐ant association. Ecology, 75(4), 1031-1041.

L22: See Styrsky & Eubanks (2007). Ecological consequences of interactions between ants and honeydew-producing insects. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274(1607), 151-164.

L23-24: and higher spread of disease by aphids.

L42: See Camargo et al. (2012). Natural history of the Neotropical arboreal ant, Odontomachus hastatus: nest sites, foraging schedule, and diet. Journal of insect science, 12(1).

L69: I liked Figure 1 representing the predictions.

L94: How many bromeliads were there (on average) on the trees? What is the average size of the bromeliads removed? The size and shape of bromeliads determines some attributes of the tree ant communities.

L95: How was the removal of the bromeliads? With a climber? How can the authors be sure that all the large bromeliads (> 15 cm) were removed if the trees are relatively large and have a complex canopy?

L96: How many bromeliads were there (on average) on the trees?

L97: Why this period? Is it enough time for the arthropod fauna to recover?

L100-103: What is the estimated prevalence of large bromeliads (> 15 cm) in orange groves?

L111: It is not a quadrant, but a cube (three dimensions), right? What was the structure of the cube?

L115: What distance?

L140-141: How did you look for nests or similar structures on the bromeliads? Did you locate alates, pupae and eggs in these structures?

L184: Table 1 does not show who these species are.

Figure 2. Does abundance have these low mean values?

L191. I suggest an improvement in the formatting of the tables in the manuscript.

L227. The authors believe that Camponotus rectangularis may be a specialist bromeliad-nesting species? Do you have information on the natural history of this species? See Camargo, R. X., Oliveira, P. S., & Muscedere, M. (2012). Natural history of the Neotropical arboreal ant, Odontomachus hastatus: nest sites, foraging schedule, and diet. Journal of insect science, 12(1).

L240. Table 2. What is Ant BD, Ant BF, Ant Z and Ant AI?

Figure 4. Isn't it too much information to put the centroids on these graphs?

I was curious to know how many ant species were sampled in total? And how many were considered bromeliad ants? I think this information should be in the text. Maybe I missed it, but I would also like to know who are the bromeliad ants…

Perhaps it would be interesting to have a table (e.g., Supplementary Material) with the relative abundance of each ant species in the treatments considered in this manuscript.

L271-282: This paragraph is a bit confusing!

L279: How far away from the forest were the selected trees? Was the edge effect not considered?

L286: Please, provide references.

L295-298: Isn't it a contradictory idea to link desiccation with an increase in ant abundance in the dry season?

L334: See Camargo et al. (2012). Natural history of the Neotropical arboreal ant, Odontomachus hastatus: nest sites, foraging schedule, and diet. Journal of insect science, 12(1).

**********

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

[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.

Do bromeliads affect the arboreal ant communities on orange trees in northwestern Costa Rica?

PONE-D-22-02509R1

Dear Dr. Diane S Srivastava,

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,

Kleber Del-Claro, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: