Monochamus Saltuarius Endangers Pinus tabuliformis Carr. and Carries Bursaphelenchus xylophilus (Steiner and Buhrer) in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is very interesting and actual. It will be of great interest for the readers.

I don't feel qualified to revise the English language. However, in my opinion, the article should be revised by a proofreading expert, because it seems to have many errors and typos.

The authors must check ALL scientific names and in the first time they appear in the text must be written in full lenght. For example, Monochamus saltuarius (Gebler, 1830) or Pinus koralensis (Siebold & Zucc.).

The entire text must be checked for missing spaces. For example, Pinuskoraiensis,Pinusbanksiana,Larixgmelinii,Piceaasperata, Pinusechinata, Pinusdensiflora, Pinusparvifloraand Pinusthunbergii. This is repeated all over the text.

Numbering the lines would be a plus to help in the revision process.

Section 4 should be Discussion and conclusions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper appears to report the first record of pinewood nematode being vectored by Monochamus salturius subsequently causing pine wilt disease in Pinus tabulaformis. It is not actually clear whether the NEW record is the host or the vector (for this region), or both.

I don't have access to my library, so have to assume that this is in fact a NEW RECORD for China. 

IF it is a new record, the paper can be acceptable for publication following major revision. 

It needs to be shortened substantially. For a Disease Note, you don't need all the sub-headings and detail, just a brief description of the methods and then a brief description of the results. As an example, see https://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/abs/10.1094/PDIS-01-13-0041-PDN.

The English and grammar need considerable work.

The Introduction (and Abstract) needs to be structured better. Start with the fact an outbreak was detected (Figure 1) of dying trees and you needed to diagnose the cause. Then you diagnosed the beetle (vector), then nematode (pinewood nematode), and associated these with pine wilt disease.

The figures are nice and clear though.

Some comments on the ms in the attached. These are not extensive, as the ms needs to almost be completely rewritten.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed all questions presented and for that reason I recommend the publication of the article.

Author Response

Thank you for your suggestion

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper has been improved. However, I still think it can be shortened. There is no need to have five sub-sections in the Methods (combine 2.1 + 2.2, and combine 2.3 + 2.4).

If 1663 longicorns were caught and only 742 were M. saltuarius, what were all the other beetles?

The significance of the "fourth-stage dispersal juveniles" is not clear. 

See attached for other comments, edits and suggestions.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx