-->PONE-D-25-68700-->-->Tracking Rehabilitated Sea Turtles in the Indian Ocean Using Satellite Telemetry: Insights into Behaviour, Ecology, and Conservation Implications-->-->PLOS One-->-->

Dear Dr. Himpson,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. We believe it has great merit; however, some improvements can still be made. Congratulations on this interesting contribution.

The reviewers agree that this is a sound and commendable manuscript that deserves publication, and they have provided several suggestions to strengthen the final version. In particular, they request additional information (e.g., tables and/or plots) regarding the tagged individuals, transmission durations, and related details.

We therefore 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 Mar 19 2026 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 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,

Antonio Medina Guerrero, 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

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Financial Disclosure section:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

We note that one or more of the authors are employed by a commercial company: “Reefscapers Ltd Plc, Male, Republic of the Maldives”

a. Please provide an amended Funding Statement declaring this commercial affiliation, as well as a statement regarding the Role of Funders in your study. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. You can update author roles in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form.

Please also include the following statement within your amended Funding Statement.

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If your commercial affiliation did play a role in your study, please state and explain this role within your updated Funding Statement.

b. Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc.

Within your Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this commercial affiliation does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests) . If this adherence statement is not accurate and  there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include both an updated Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement in your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that Figure 1 and Supplementary Information.docx in your submission contain satellite 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 Figure(s) [#] 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/

4. Please include a copy of Table 1 which you refer to in your text on page 12.

5. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

6. 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: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: N/A

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: No

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: Here rehabilitated sea turtles in the Maldives were equipped with satellite tags and then tracked for several months in the Indian Ocean. The movements of three species are described as is the connectivity with other known foraging and nesting sites. In many cases the cause of cessation of tracking signals was not known.

This is a solid manuscript. Congratulations to the authors on equipping so many turtles. I think this work will make a nice contribution, but I have some suggestions for improvement.

1. Line 87. “ … migrating TO the nearby Chagos archipelago to nest …”

Probably the best paper to cite showing post-nesting green turtles returning from Chagos to the Maldives is this one: Current Biology 30, 3236–3242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.05.086

2. As the reasons for the cessation of tracking is an important part of this work, I would show some plots of the diagnostic data relayed from the tags. See:

“Why do Argos satellite tags stop relaying data? Ecology and Evolution 11:7093–7101. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7558”

I would show some plots of number of tag transmissions versus day of deployment to show how you assessed that battery exhaustion was not the cause of the end of tracking. Similarly show an example or two of the performance of the salt-water switch. These plots would help others to look at these diagnostic data and exclude these reasons for tag failure.

3. Immature turtles have been tracked by various groups in the Indian Ocean. Some individuals show residence to coastal areas, other take on a pelagic existence. See Fig. 2 a and b in https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2418

See also for example:

Dominique Pelletier, David Roos, Stéphane Ciccione

Oceanic survival and movements of wild and captive-reared immature green turtles (Chelonia mydas) in the Indian Ocean. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0990-7440(03)00005-6

In your Discussion, I would briefly place your observations in the context of this other work tracking immatures in the Indian Ocean.

4. You tracked males which is very existing. But you never mention those results. I would briefly describe if males and females showed different movements. There is an expectation that males return to breed more frequently than females. Did you see any evidence for this difference. See for example doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00043

5. Line 265: “… one tag recorded a sudden change of direction and speed before the transmitters’ location ended in a coastal town in Sri Lanka …”

I would show a plot of these data and discuss this is good evidence for mortality. Others have used this sort of information to infer mortality. I would place your observation in the context of others who have done similar.

6. Lines 266. “… a second tag gave maximum depth readings of ~4000m beginning 5 days after the animals release and transmissions ending 20 days later.”

I do not believe these data. Note you sometimes get a blip in the transmission of data so erroneous values are obtained. Also the pressure transducer can be impacted by debris etc. and so give an anomalous reading. The tag might have relayed “max depth ever recorded”. So then the information is relayed many time so you can see if an outlier reading was just a blip. I would check. Then discuss that these values are likely erroneous so you can warn others.

7. Lines 270. I would include a frequency distribution of length of tracking across individuals. “6 of these had a very short tracking duration (less than 6 days) …”. We’ve put on dozens of tags immature turtles in Chagos and never had such short durations of tracking. I would discuss possible reasons. Do you think these animals are quickly dying or quickly damaging the tags ?

8. Fig. 3. Put on some axis labels. I do not know what this plot is trying to show.

In summary, a solid manuscript that with some revisions could make a nice contribution. Graeme Hays

Reviewer #2: The manuscript is very well written, reads smoothly, and provides a substantial and highly interesting volume of data. In addition, the discussion is well structured and clearly argued. I can only offer a few minor comments, minor considerations, and one broader reflection.

Both the Results and Discussion sections indicate that, in several cases, tag transmissions were of very short duration, and in many instances it was not possible to determine the status of the animal, such as whether capture events or anomalous behavior may have occurred. Given that the study spans a relatively long time period and that tags from the same manufacturer were used throughout, and considering the growing concern within the scientific community regarding battery reliability—largely driven by global shortages associated with the rapid expansion of electric vehicles, electric scooters, and other autonomous electric transport—it would be worth exploring whether a relationship exists between the number of turtles exhibiting short transmission durations and the period in which the tags were acquired.

Specifically, it could be very informative to examine a potential correlation between transmission duration and the year of tag acquisition, in order to assess whether battery failure might be contributing to early signal loss, as has been discussed in recent scientific forums addressing tag performance issues (e.g., SCRS–ICCAT discussions on battery reliability). Alternatively, as suggested in the discussion, short transmission durations may be related to biological or environmental factors, such as tag abrasion against rocky substrates, particularly in the case of Eretmochelys imbricata (hawksbill turtle).

Another minor but important suggestion would be to include a summary table for each tagged individual. As the number of specimens is limited, such a table could concisely present biometric data, species identification, and key results, including transmission duration, time at liberty, mean swimming speed, and total distance traveled. This addition would greatly facilitate the reader’s interpretation of the results and enhance the overall clarity of the manuscript.

Lines 19-21: Please consider including, among other factors, habitat loss, climate change, and pollution, as these are additional drivers that may lead marine turtles toward extinction.

**********

-->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: Yes:   Jose Carlos Báez

**********

[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.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

-->

Tracking Rehabilitated Sea Turtles in the Indian Ocean Using Satellite Telemetry: Insights into Behaviour, Ecology, and Conservation Implications

PONE-D-25-68700R1

Dear Dr. Himpson,

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. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support.

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,

Antonio Medina Guerrero, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: