Next Article in Journal
Ecology and Biology of the Rare Endemic Land Leech Xerobdella anulata (Xerobdellidae)
Previous Article in Journal
Reproductive Mode of Corbicula tobae (Martens, 1900): Brooding and Larval Morphology in Lake Toba (Indonesia)
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Ixodes apronophorus Schulze (Acari: Ixodida: Ixodidae): Distribution, Abundance, and Diversity of Its Mammal Hosts in West Siberia (Results of a 54-Year Long Surveillance)

Diversity 2022, 14(9), 702; https://doi.org/10.3390/d14090702
by Alfried V. Karimov 1, Natalia P. Korallo-Vinarskaya 1,2, Yulia F. Kuzmenko 1 and Maxim V. Vinarski 3,4,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Diversity 2022, 14(9), 702; https://doi.org/10.3390/d14090702
Submission received: 11 July 2022 / Revised: 12 August 2022 / Accepted: 18 August 2022 / Published: 24 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Animal Diversity)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review

 

Title: Ixodes apronophorus (Schulze ) (Acari: Ixodida): Distribution, abundance, and diversity of its mammal hosts in West Siberia (results of a 54-year long surveillance)

 

Authors: Karimov A.V. et al.

 

General comments:

This manuscript comprises very important faunistical data, which are well presented, and I would like to recommend acceptance of this manuscript for Diversity journal after minor improvements.  Following are suggestions for correction:

a) first row: instead of Ixodida in the title of the manuscript should be written family name Ixodidae

 

b) in chapter introduction in row 45 ordinal number of refrence Sandor 15 should be repleaced with 16 because this reference in chapter references is mentioned under the number 16. While in 47th row reference number 16 should be repleaced with 15.

 

c) also in chapter introduction in rows 53, 57, 61 reference number 15 should be repleaced with number 16.

 

d) in chapter material & methods in row 103 after species D silvarum the dot after the letter D. is missing.

 

 e) in chapter Discussion in row 334, number 15 as reference number should be repleaced with number 16.

 

 

Author Response

See the enclosed file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting paper, but does need a bit of work. Most of my comments are on the attached pdf. I would like to see:

1. Attention paid to latin names. many used are out of data. Taxonomic authority should be given at first mention of the latin name in both the abstract and text.

2. More information on the analytical methods need to be given. Descriptions of statistics are lacking.

3. Some of the tables are had to understand. I didn't really get what was being presented in Table 1, so a better description is needed. 

4. Several supplemental tables were refenced but not provided.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please find our point-by-point answers to Reviewer 2 comments in the enclosed file 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Most of my comments were addressed.

Back to TopTop