Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMarch 18, 2024
Decision Letter - Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil, Editor

PONE-D-24-10904Quantifying the availability of seasonal surface water and identifying the drivers of change within tropical forests in CambodiaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mamalis,

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 May 24 2024 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,

Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil

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. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

"This work was funded by the Natural Environment Research Council, UK Research Institute under the Adapting to the Challenges of a Changing Environment DTP https://accedtp.ac.uk/. The grant was awarded to LM to complete this work [grant code: NE/L002450/1, 2020]."

Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. 

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

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

"..Funding: This work was supported by the Natural Environment Research Council, UK Research Institute under the Adapting to the Challenges of a Changing Environment DTP [grant code: NE/L002450/1, 2020]."

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.

5. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. 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. 

Before we proceed with your manuscript, 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 identifying or sensitive patient information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., a Research Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board, etc.). 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 to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. You also have the option of uploading the data as Supporting Information files, but we would recommend depositing data directly to a data repository if possible.

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

6. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.

7. We note that Figures 1, 3 and Supporting Figure (S6 Fig) in your submission contain map images 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:

1) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figures 1, 3 and Supporting Figure (S6 Fig) 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].”

2) 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/

8. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information. 

9. 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:

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: I Don't Know

**********

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: Reviewer Comments

Introduction

• The introduction provides a comprehensive overview of the importance of surface water and the threats it faces globally. However, it could benefit with a more detailed and articulate explanation of the study's objectives in the context of broader literature.

Materials and Methods

1. Study Area:

The description of the study area is good and detailed. However, the author should provide more details about the climate of the study area, for example, different graphs and values on the average monthly and yearly rainfall, temperature, and humidity. Since rainfall is an important part of the study, different graphs of the historical average monthly, yearly, and seasonal rainfall would be beneficial.

2. Data Analysis:

The authors have not mentioned if any other image pre-processing is carried out besides cloud masking. It would be beneficial to mention if any other image pre-processing was carried out.

The authors should also mention why Landsat was used, instead of other sources of satellite images, like Sentient 2.

3. Implications for the giant ibis:

The authors should consider providing more explanation on how the spatial regression approach using INLA modeling accounts for spatial autocorrelation and the choice of covariates in the model.

Results

• It would be recommended for the authors to carry out a trend analysis of precipitation, to see if there is any trend in precipitation if it is decreasing, and how this could be affecting the surface waters.

• Additionally, it is recommended the authors provide more detail on the statistical methods used to analyze the data, including any assumptions made and how they were validated.

Discussion

• It is recommended that the authors reference similar studies and make comparisons with similar studies.

• Also, the authors should provide the uncertainties and limitations of the study.

• Additionally, the authors should provide a conclusion section, providing a summary of key findings and including recommendations for future studies, including how the findings could inform conservation strategies or management practices.

Overall Comment

Overall, the paper is well-written and can be accepted for publishing after making a few changes. Importantly the authors need to give more details in the Study area and methods section and give some reference to other studies in the results and discussion. Additionally, the authors need to include conclusion and recommendations sections.

Reviewer #2: The general approach of the paper is very interesting and well thought. However, I would need to be able to see the code of the analysis to recommend acceptance. Without google earth engine, this seems not possible. I would therefore recommend that the authors publish the code in an open access repository.

**********

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

Dear Dr. Kozhikkodan Veettil,

Many thanks for your response to the submission of the paper titled ‘Quantifying the availability of seasonal surface water and identifying the drivers of change within tropical forests in Cambodia’, submission number: PONE-D-24-10904. I really appreciate you and the reviewers taking the time to evaluate this research and provide some useful feedback to improve it.

Please find a table below with information on how we have addressed and responded to each comment within the review.

Comment Response

Editor comments:

1.Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

Completed: I have referred to the PLOS ONE formatting guidelines and have edited to my manuscript accordingly.

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.

Completed: There is no specific permit number for the data collection associated with this study. I have therefore included a statement to explain this within the acknowledgements section.

3. Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed.

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Completed: I have added in the sentence regarding funder involvement to my revised cover letter.

4. 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.

Completed: I have removed any reference to the funders from my acknowledgements section.

5. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly.

Completed: I have added information to the data availability statement explaining why we are unable to share the giant ibis nest location data for ethical reasons.

6. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.

Completed: I have created a github repository where all the scripts are saved and available for this project.

Completed: I have written up the Google Earth Engine scripts as .txt files so that they are accessible to anyone to read via the github repository.

Completed: I have saved and commented on the relevant R scripts for reference. These are also available via the gitbuh repository.

Completed: I have updated the access to the colab analysis script to ‘share with anyone with the link’. I have also updated the comments on this script as well. This remains available through the url in the data availability statement.

7. We note that Figures 1, 3 and Supporting Figure (S6 Fig) in your submission contain map images 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). 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.

Completed: I have added in the license information into the figure captions for the data sources used to create Fig 1, Fig 3 and S6 Fig. I have attached the signed permission to publish form completed by myself and BirdLife to my resubmission. I have also added in this information to the data availability statement. I have also edited Fig 1 slightly by adding the location of Economic Land Concessions to the map. I have put it through PACE for checking and have uploaded this edited figure.

8. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly.

Completed: I have added all the titles and captions of my Supporting Information at the end of the main text. I have updated these in the Supporting Information documents as well. Each Supporting Information has been saved as a separate file.

9. 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.

Completed: I have reviewed all my references to ensure they are all correct and included within the text. I have also converted all my references into the correct PLOS ONE format.

Reviewer #1 comments

1.Introduction:

The introduction provides a comprehensive overview of the importance of surface water and the threats it faces globally. However, it could benefit with a more detailed and articulate explanation of the study's objectives in the context of broader literature.

Completed: I have added in references to broader literature to provide more context within the introduction and to emphasise why this study’s objectives.

2.Study Area:

The description of the study area is good and detailed. However, the author should provide more details about the climate of the study area, for example, different graphs and values on the average monthly and yearly rainfall, temperature, and humidity. Since rainfall is an important part of the study, different graphs of the historical average monthly, yearly, and seasonal rainfall would be beneficial.

Completed: I have added in some relevant information regarding the climate in Cambodia, specifically referencing Thoeun et al., 2015 which has detailed information on Cambodia’s climate, including a number of historical plots.

3.Data Analysis:

The authors have not mentioned if any other image pre-processing is carried out besides cloud masking. It would be beneficial to mention if any other image pre-processing was carried out. The authors should also mention why Landsat was used, instead of other sources of satellite images, like Sentient 2.

Completed: I have added in more details regarding the pre-processing of the LandSat 7 data, including more elaboration on the cloud masking and the removal of a scanline error within the data.

Completed: I have added information into the methods section explaining why we chose to LandSat 7 satellite images for this study.

4.Results:

It would be recommended for the authors to carry out a trend analysis of precipitation, to see if there is any trend in precipitation if it is decreasing, and how this could be affecting the surface waters. Additionally, it is recommended the authors provide more detail on the statistical methods used to analyze the data, including any assumptions made and how they were validated.

Completed: I have completed a linear regression to look at the trend in precipitation over time. I have added the statistical results into the results section and have added in a figure and table outlining the findings in the Supporting Information (S6 Fig and S7 Table).

Completed: I have added in more information about how the models worked, including assumptions that we made and how we validated them.

5.Discussion:

It is recommended that the authors reference similar studies and make comparisons with similar studies. Also, the authors should provide the uncertainties and limitations of the study. Additionally, the authors should provide a conclusion section, providing a summary of key findings and including recommendations for future studies, including how the findings could inform conservation strategies or management practices.

Completed: I have added in a lot more references to similar studies and direct comparisons to this literature within the discussion.

Completed: I have included information on limitations to this study, such as not considering HEP dam influence directly within the analysis and the use of remote sensing alone with no ground truthing data.

Completed: I have added in a conclusion and recommendations section to the end of paper which summarises the key findings as well as the recommendations for future work and how the results can inform conservation strategies in this area.

Reviewer #2 comments

The general approach of the paper is very interesting and well thought. However, I would need to be able to see the code of the analysis to recommend acceptance. Without google earth engine, this seems not possible. I would therefore recommend that the authors publish the code in an open access repository.

Completed: I have cleaned and commented all of the scripts that were used for this analysis and made them available in a git hub repository.

I hope this information is enough to address the changes suggested for this manuscript. Should you require any more changes or additional information then please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely

Louisa Mamalis

PhD researcher

Department of Biology

University of York

York

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers-resubmission.docx
Decision Letter - Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil, Editor

Quantifying the availability of seasonal surface water and identifying the drivers of change within tropical forests in Cambodia

PONE-D-24-10904R1

Dear Dr. Mamalis,

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. 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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. 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

**********

5. 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

**********

6. 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: (No Response)

**********

7. 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

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil, Editor

PONE-D-24-10904R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mamalis,

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

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, 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 customercare@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. Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil

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 .