Bioactivity of Ethanolic Extracts of Dipteryx punctata on Colletotrichum musae
and Denise Castro Lustosa 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article concerns the interesting use of alcoholic extracts of Dipteryx punctata on Colletotrichum musae in the control of this disease on bananas.
The abstract was prepared correctly and contains all the necessary information included in the paper.
In the introduction, the authors mentioned the production of these fruits on a global scale and how to protect bananas from the fungal disease. Important information to be included in the introduction are examples of other fungal pathogens attacking these fruits. In addition, perhaps it would be possible to find and include, information on what financial losses these diseases cause ?
The chapter materials and methods was prepared with the rules of writing scientific articles. It needs only a few minor corrections
2.1. missing italics in line 81 (Dipteryx punctata)
2.2. identification of the strain isolated from bananas was only morphological ? In this situation, genetic identification would also be recommended
2.3 Mistake in the name of the medium. In the abstract the authors write about PDA, here they use the abbreviation BDA. I would also suggest that the formulas used in growth rate calculations be presented on separate lines. This makes the text easier to read.
The Results chapter was prepared correctly.
The caption of Figure 1 lacks italics in the word Colleotrichum musae
In the case of tables 1 and 2, I think it would have been useful to highlight the most important results, for example, by making them bold. This would make it easier to interpret the table.
In figures 2, 3, 5, 6, 9 and 11, the standard deviation is missing from the bars. If the experiments were performed in several repetitions, they should be included.
On figures 4 and 7, I would suggest adding descriptions to the X and Y axes
In figure 9 the description of the Y axis is not in English, this should be corrected
The Discussion section elaborates on the topics in the introduction and compares the results obtained by the authors with available results in the literature. However, it would be useful to clean up a bit the descriptions that appear in the individual paragraphs. For example, focus on in vitro effects at the beginning and then in vivo. There are also frequent examples of plants, e.g. Clove, which are mentioned every so often in the text. Perhaps it would be possible to somehow arrange the information on one species/extract in one paragraph?
In the conclusion, are the authors able to refer to the potential use of extracts for fruit storage ? Will future research be exclusively about field studies on banana plantations ?
Author Response
1 . Introduction: The authors mention the production of these fruits on a global scale and how to protect bananas from fungal disease. Important information to include in the introduction are examples of other fungal pathogens that attack these fruits. Also, maybe it would be possible to find and include information about what financial losses these diseases cause?
Response: In the second paragraph, the Banana Fusarium Wilt Tropical Race 4 disease was added, which affects bananas since 2019 and also helped to reduce export production and, consequently, the current financial losses.
- Material and Methods:
2.1 Missing italics on line 81.
Response: Added italic to species name Dipteryx punctata.
2.2 Was the identification of the strain isolated from bananas only morphological? In this situation, genetic identification would also be recommended.
Response: Thanks for the recommendation. E Molecular identifications will be carried out for in-depth tests such as those in the field.
2.3 Middle name error. In the abstract the authors write about PDA, here they use the abbreviation BDA. I also suggest that the formulas used in the growth rate calculations be presented on separate lines. This makes the text easier to read.
Response: All abbreviations of BDA have been corrected to PDA. And the formulas have been separated from the text for easier reading.
- Results
Figure 1 – the word Colletotrichum musae is not in italic.
Response: Added italic to the scientific name of the species.
Tables 1 and 2 – I think it would have been helpful to highlight the most important results, for example by putting them in bold. This makes the table easier to interpret.
Response: Added values ​​highlighted in bold.
In figures 2, 3, 5, 6, 9 and 11 – the standard deviation is missing from the bars. If experiments were performed in multiple replicates, they should be included.
Response: Graphs 2 and 5 were excluded at the suggestion of another reviewer, and deviations in graphs were added in the legend with extract names and coumarin standard.
In figures 4 and 7 – I suggest adding descriptions to the X and Y axes.
Response: Added axis names.
In figure 9 – the description of the Y axis is not in English, this should be corrected.
Response: The axis description has been corrected.
- Discussion
It deepens the topics of the introduction and compares the results obtained by the authors with the results available in the literature. However, it would be helpful to clean up the descriptions that appear in the individual paragraphs a bit. For example, focus on in vitro effects at first and then on in vivo effects. There are also frequent examples of plants, such as cloves, that are mentioned from time to time in the text. Perhaps it would be possible to somehow organize information about a species∕extract into a paragraph?
Response: The discussion has been completely reorganized.
- Conclusion
Are the authors able to refer to the potential use of extracts for fruit storage? Will future research be exclusively on field studies in banana plantations?
Response: Added information in the last paragraph. Thank you very much.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript presents an original study concerning the activity of a natural extract against o common phytopathogens of bananas. The extract comes from a commercial plant, which rise the possibility of using by-products of this crop to obtain valuable products for biocontrol purpose.
However, changes are required for the manuscript to be accepted for publication:
Line 16, 21, 100, 126, 134…and everywhere else – in vitro/ in vivo and other syntagms of latin origin should be written in italics
Line 38-41 – please revise the paragraph as it is not clear what the authors meant
Line 81- italicize Latin name
Line 88, 94, 107, 139 and anywhere else – put spaces between the value (number) and the degree symbol
Line 190 – Figure 1 – move the caption of the figure beneath it and not above it
Figure 2 is redundant and should be removed
Line 247-248 – please revise. Is not clear
Figure 5 – please remove
Line 263-266 – please revise. The statement is not clear
Figure 9 and figure 11 – please correct the graphs as there are words in Portuguese there!
Line 380-385 – please revise. It is not clear
Line 388 – please revise
Author Response
General comment:
Lines 16, 21, 100, 126, 134… and elsewhere – in vitro∕in vivo and other phrases of Latin origin must be written in italic.
Response: Words has been changed to italics.
- Introduction
Lines 38-41 – review the paragraph as it is unclear what the authors meant.
Response: The paragraph has been revised and the ideas organized.
- Material and Methods
Line 81 – Latin name in italic.
Response: The name has been changed to italics.
General comment:
Lines 88, 94, 107, 139 and elsewhere – place spaces between the value (number) and the degree symbol.
Response: The separation between the number and the symbol has been placed.
- Results
Line 190 – Figure 1 – move the figure caption below it and not above it.
Response: The figure caption has been moved.
Figure 2 – Is redundant and must be removed.
Response: The figure has been removed.
Lines 247-248 – Review. It is unclear.
Response: The sentence has been revised for better understanding.
Figure 5 – Please remove.
Response: The figure has been removed.
Lines 263-266 – Review. The statement is not clear.
Response: Revisions were made to better understand the paragraph.
Figure 9 and 11 – Please correct the graphics as there are Portuguese words there!
Response: Corrected the words.
- Discussion
Lines 380-385 – Review. This is not clear.
Response: The paragraph has been revised and the discussion as a whole reorganized.
Line 388 – Please review.
Response: The repeated phrase has been removed and restructured. Thank you very much.
Reviewer 3 Report
Authors should review some sentences and paragraphs that are difficult to understand in their current format. Specific corrections and suggestions are included in the attached pdf
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
1 . Introduction
Line 14 – Replacement of the word “Bioactive”.
Response: The word was replaced by “Bioactivity” as suggested.
Line 53 – Replacement of the word “used”.
Response: The word was replaced with “commonly employed” as suggested.
Line 63 – Replacement of the word “fungitoxic”.
Response: The word was replaced with “fungicide” as suggested.
Line 66 – Cursive in the word “Fabaceae” and replacement of the word “important”.
Response: Added cursive and replaced the word with “relevant” as suggested.
- Material and Methods
Line 81 – Add cursive to the scientific name and remove the word “are”.
Response: Added cursive and removed suggested word.
Line 99 – Did the authors employed specific taxonomic literature for the morphological determination of the strain? Specify culture media (PDA, MA etc).
Response: The reference used for the morphological analysis of the phytopathogen and the culture medium used (PDA) were added.
General comment:
Correction of the abbreviation BDA for PDA.
Response: All abbreviation corrections have been made.
Line 127 – Addition of the word “surface”.
Response: Added “surface” before the word “disinfected”.
Line 136 – How much time elapsed between the application of the spray and the artificial inoculation of the phatogen? Indicate to reinforce the idea of ​​a preventive test.
Response: The approximate time for carrying out the entire preventive test was indicated, counting from the application of the products on the first banana to the last one, and simultaneously with the natural drying of them, sequentially to this phase the fungi were added.
Line 145 – Again, how much time between both procedures?
Response: The bananas were inoculated with the fungus and the incubation took place for 48 hours, doctors were carried out after this period and then the products were sprayed.
General comment:
Lines 157, 168, 222 and 387 – Removal of the beginning of the word “phytopathogen”.
Response: The words “phyto” were removed.
- Results
Line 178 – Authors should indicate if changes in shape and color pof the treated strains did also occur in the reverse view of the colonies.
Response: Changes in shape and placement could also be observed on the reverse face of the board. Information has been added to the text.
Figure 1 – Cursive in the species name.
Response: Added cursive in Colletotrichum musae.
Figure 3 – Control word in Portuguese.
Response: Change the word to “control”.
Figure 9 – Word Concnetrations (%) in Portuguese.
Response: Change the word to “concentration (%).
- Discussion
Line 342 – Replacement of the word “role”.
Response: The word was replaced with “potential” as suggested.
Line 343 – Replacement of the word “in”.
Response: The word was replaced with “against” as suggested.
General comment:
To the names of fungal and plant species, add the name of the identifier (author).
Response: Added authors in scientific names.
Line 345 – Cursive in the name C. musae.
Response: Entered cursive.
Line 348 – Addition of the genus name of the species D. punctata.
Response: Added name Dipteryx.
Line 362 – Replacement of the word “cultivation”.
Response: The word was replaced as requested with “culture”.
Line 365 – Removal of the word “greater”.
Response: The word has been removed.
Line 373 – In view of the results obtained, what type of effect do the authors hypothesize for the natural products used here, inhibitory or fungistatic?
Response: The Discussion topic was redone and the paragraphs structured for a better understanding of the action reported in the work and the references used. The extracts are able to inhibit fungal growth in vitro and the consequent action of this inhibition is the fungistatic effect (the fungus does not die; it has its growth paralyzed or retarded).
Line 388 – Nonsense when reading, rewriting.
Response: The phrase has been removed and rearranged.
Line 393 – Replacement of the word “of”.
Response: The word was replaced with “employing a” as suggested.
Line 399 – Removal of the words “with” and “used”.
Response: The words have been removed.
Lines 443 – Not clear; rewrite.
Response: The paragraph has been restructured and the entire discussion reorganized.
- Conclusion
Line 451 – Replacement of the word “for”.
Response: The word was replaced with “on” as suggested. Thank you very much.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript now meets the criteria to be published. Please make a correction at line 532 ("and" not "e").
