PONE-D-22-16646Chemotaxis response and age-stage, two-sex life table of the Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius)  (coccinellidae: coleoptera) against different aphid speciesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zaka,

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 by the two reviewers during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 17 2023 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,

Nicolas Desneux

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)

[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: Partly

**********

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: No

**********

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 appreciate the Editor to give me a chance to review an interesting and valuable paper. I would like add few points in the manuscript entitled "Chemotaxis response and age-stage, two-sex life table of the Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius) (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera) against different aphid species". In my opinion, this paper has a good potential to be published in the journal. I have indicated my comments directly in the attached annotated manuscript.

Reviewer #2: In this study, the authors investigated the biological parameters and olfactory response of Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) under laboratory conditions by providing three different aphid species i.e., mustard aphid (Lipaphis erysimi), citrus black aphid (Toxoptera citricida), and peach aphid (Diuraphis noxia) as a food source. Although the topic is worth of interest and the methods used are standard, there is insufficient data to support its main conclusion. I encourage the authors to work more and notably to assess the population projection using TIMING-MSChart computer program. Besides, the authors should check the predation rate using age-stage, two-sex life table. The manuscript needs careful proofreading and revision. Grammar mistakes are undermining the significance of this study. Therefore, I think it cannot be accepted in its current form in PONE. I recommend a major revision, in which the following key points should be addressed.

Major Points:

- The authors should add concluding lines. It should be more specific and striking.

- The introduction section is not coherent. There are many useless sentences and lack key information. It should be rewritten completely. The author needs to add info about Age-stage, two-sex life table approach by TWO-SEX MS Chart. What is the difference between this technique and the traditional technique?

-In results, please follow the correct pattern for writing the statistical values. For example in L168, you may replace (F=19.35; F2,87; P<0.0001) by (F=19.35, DF=2,87, P<0.0001). Please write the exact P value. Follow this pattern throughout the manuscript.

- It is recommended to discuss and explain what should be the appropriate policies based on the findings of the current study. Moreover, the results should be further elaborated to show how they could be used for real applications.

-Figure 1-4: I strongly suggest to replace these figures by color figures. The colors must be more contrasting, so that readers can easily understand the variations among different parameters etc.

-In statistical analysis section, the authors missed key references (Chi et al. 2022a; 2022b) that strongly support the age-stage, two-sex, life table approach.

- Chi et al. 2022a. TWOSEX-MSChart: the key tool for life table research and education. Entomologia Generalis. 42 (6): 845-849.

- Chi et al. 2022b. Innovative application of set theory, Cartesian product, and multinomial theorem in demographic research. Entomologia Generalis. 42 (6) 863-874.

- I strongly suggest the authors to check the population projection via TIMING-MSChart computer program. Construct figures of population projections, add formula of population projection statistical analysis section, add results with separate heading (such as Population Projection), and finally, discuss these results in discussion section by comparing it with recently published articles from reputable journals.

- I strongly suggest authors to check the predation rate using age-stage, two-sex life table approach, as this software precisely describes the predation rate.

Ding, H. Y., Lin, Y. Y., Tuan, S. J., Tang, L. C., Chi, H., Atlıhan, R., ... & Güncan, A. (2021). Integrating demography, predation rate, and computer simulation for evaluation of Orius strigicollis as biological control agent against Frankliniella intonsa. Entomologia Generalis, 41(2), 179-196.

- Islam, Y., Güncan, A., Fan, Y., Zhou, X., Naeem, A., & Shah, F. M. (2022). Age-stage, two-sex life table and predation parameters of Harmonia axyridis Pallas (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), reared on Acyrthosiphon pisum (Harris)(Hemiptera: Aphididae), at four different temperatures. Crop Protection, 106029.

- Yılmaz, M., & Polat Akköprü, E. (2021). Predation rate linked to life table of Chrysoperla carnea (Stephen)(Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) fed on small walnut aphid (Chromaphis juglandicola)(Kalt.)(Hemiptera: Aphididae): with population and predation projections. Phytoparasitica, 49(2), 217-228.

- In Table 2, the authors didn’t added the standard errors, also missed the P values and different letters to show the significant differences. These are very important, I am surprised why authors missed these key information.

- The authors should add a separate conclusion section after discussion. The conclusion section should be concise and to the point.

-Correct Ref# 39:

“Chi H. TIMING-MSChart: a computer program for the population projection based on age-stage, two-sex life table. 2016” should be replace by “Chi, H. TWOSEX-MS Chart: A Computer Program for the Age-Stage, Two-Sex Life Table Analysis. 2022. Available online: http://140.120.197.173/ecology/Download/Twosex-MSChart-exe-B100000.rar (access date).” Please mention the access date (day, month, year).

- Regarding data availability, upload all raw datasets of the life table and functional response as supplementary files. Raw data files should be available as supplementary files.

- Please improve the figures quality especially the font size and colors. These figures should be more striking.

**********

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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-16646_Boopathi.pdf

Chemotaxis response and age-stage, two-sex life table of the Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius)  (coccinellidae: coleoptera) against different aphid species

PONE-D-22-16646R1

Dear Dr. Zaka,

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,

Nicolas Desneux

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Reviewers' comments: