Harmonic radar tracking of individual melon flies, Zeugodacus cucurbitae, in Hawaii: Determining movement parameters in cage and field settings

Nicole D. Miller; Theodore J. Yoder; Nicholas C. Manoukis; Lori A. F. N. Carvalho; Matthew S. Siderhurst

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0276987

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionAugust 8, 2022
19 Sep 2022 Decision Letter - Ramzi Mansour, Editor PONE-D-22-21998Harmonic radar tracking of individual melon flies, Zeugodacus cucurbitae, in Hawaii: Determining movement parameters in cage and field settingsPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Siderhurst, 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 Nov 03 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, Ramzi Mansour 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. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why. 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 the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "This study was supported in part by ARS project 2040-22430-027-00D and a Kauffman and Miller Research Award, Daniel B. Suter Endowment in Biology, Eastern Mennonite University." We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, 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: "NCM, MSS, LAFN - This study was supported in part by ARS project 2040-22430-027-00D, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, https://www.ars.usda.gov/ NDM, TJY - This study was supported in part by a Kauffman and Miller Research Award, Daniel B. Suter Endowment in Biology, Eastern Mennonite University, https://emu.edu/science-seminars/daniel-b-suter-endowment The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." Please provide an amended statement that declares all the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now. Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement. Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 5. We note that Figure 9 in your submission contain satellite image which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright. We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission: a) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 9 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text: “I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.” Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission. In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].” b) If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only. The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful: USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/ Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/ USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/# Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/ [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: Interesting information that warrants publication. I strongly suggest to reduce the Discussion, it is much too long. Firstly, please discuss only results relevant to male flies, you did not release female flies as far as I could tell. Therefore, remove any references to oviposition etc... Secondly, please reduce the discussion by removing unnecessarily lengthy comparisons with other literature. For example, discussion on wind direction: State that the following references found flies did orientate with wind direction, while the following did not. You do not need to explain what each reference found in detail. I would also give the whole document another detailed read to remove spelling and grammatical errors, I am not sure I caught them all. ****** 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. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-21998-ENTO519259.pdf https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276987.r001
Revision 1
24 Sep 2022 Author Response Responses to specific comments: Associate Editor 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. - We have re-checked and believe we are meeting all of PLOS ONE's style requirements. 2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why. - The following text has been added to both the descriptions of the papaya and open field experiments, “No permit was required for access to this field site.” 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. - We have resolved the mismatch. 4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript… - Funding information has been removed from the Acknowledgement. We would like our Funding Statement to read as follows, “"NCM, MSS, LAFN - This study was supported in part by ARS project 2040-22430-027-00D, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, www.ars.usda.gov/ NDM, TJY - This study was supported in part by a Kauffman and Miller Research Award, Daniel B. Suter Endowment in Biology, Eastern Mennonite University, emu.edu/science-seminars/daniel-b-suter-endowment There was no additional external funding received for this study. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." There is no award number for the Kauffman and Miller Research Award. 5. We note that Figure 9 in your submission contain satellite image which may be copyrighted… - The Figure 9 has been replaced with a map that we independently generated that does not include any copyrighted material. The following text has been added to the Figure 9 legend, “Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 2011, USGS High Resolution State Orthoimagery for the East Side of Hawaii Island: 05QKB820780_200912_0x5000m_CL_1: U.S. Geological Survey.” Reviewer 1 General comments Firstly, please discuss only results relevant to male flies, you did not release female flies as far as I could tell. Therefore, remove any references to oviposition etc... - The sentence in the discussion that mentions oviposition has been rewritten. We have examined the discussion to ensure that we do not discuss any female specific behaviors as the reviewer has rightly pointed out that we did not track females in this study. I strongly suggest to reduce the Discussion, it is much too long… Secondly, please reduce the discussion by removing unnecessarily lengthy comparisons with other literature. For example, discussion on wind direction: State that the following references found flies did orientate with wind direction, while the following did not. You do not need to explain what each reference found in detail. - The discussion has been edited to remove multiple lengthy literature comparisons. As the reviewer suggested, we have condensed sections of text in an attempt to avoid discussing each reference in extended depth. Specific sections that were shorten include passages addressing literature on wind direction, flight distances, and comparisons of HR tracking with other ways fly movement might be studied. These reductions have resulted in the removal of approximately one and a half pages of text. I would also give the whole document another detailed read to remove spelling and grammatical errors, I am not sure I caught them all. - The entire manuscript has been read over again with several additional errors corrected. Specific comments Line 58 – corrected as suggested Line 59 – corrected as suggested Line 61 – corrected as suggested Line 70 – corrected as suggested Line 71 – trapping networks are broader than just Medfly Line 97 – corrected as suggested Line 106 – corrected as suggested Line 108 – corrected as suggested Line 109 – corrected as suggested Line 141 – info added as suggested Line 170 – corrected as suggested Lines 202-203 – text added to clarify as suggested Line 206 – text added as suggested Line 225 – text added as suggested Line 237 – text added as suggested Line 279 – corrected as suggested Line 323 – corrected as suggested Line 332 – corrected as suggested Line 347 – corrected as suggested Lines 358-359 – sentence removed as suggested Line 385 – corrected as suggested Line 427 – corrected as suggested Line 393 – corrected as suggested Line 401 – corrected as suggested Line 405 – corrected as suggested Line 454 – changed to “short-range” Line 471 – corrected as suggested Line 474 – corrected as suggested Line 509 – corrected as suggested Line 512 – corrected as suggested and sentence removed as suggested Line 518 – corrected as suggested Line 520 – corrected as suggested Line 522 – CRW is defined earlier in the paper Line 551 – added full name as suggested Line 555 – added full name as suggested Line 559 – added full name as suggested Lines 561-563, 575-578, 586-588, 605-609 – We are not familiar with a scientific writing style guide that forbids results in figure legends. In fact, we found several style guides that encourage the inclusion of brief results and reporting statistics in figure legends. We believe the legends are not overly long and would enhance the readers understanding of the figure. If the editor feels we should remove these we will do so. Line 565 – added full name as suggested Line 569 – added full name as suggested Line 573 – added full name as suggested Line 580 – added full name as suggested Line 584 – added full name as suggested Line 590 – added full name as suggested Line 611 – added full name as suggested Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276987.r002
18 Oct 2022 Decision Letter - Ramzi Mansour, Editor Harmonic radar tracking of individual melon flies, Zeugodacus cucurbitae, in Hawaii: Determining movement parameters in cage and field settings PONE-D-22-21998R1 Dear Dr. Siderhurst, 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, Ramzi Mansour Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276987.r003
Formally Accepted
20 Oct 2022 Acceptance Letter - Ramzi Mansour, Editor PONE-D-22-21998R1 Harmonic radar tracking of individual melon flies, Zeugodacus cucurbitae, in Hawaii: Determining movement parameters in cage and field settings Dear Dr. Siderhurst: 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. Ramzi Mansour Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276987.r004

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 .