Trait Variation between Two Wild Specimens of Pleurotus ostreatus and Their Progeny in the Context of Usefulness in Nematode Control
, Małgorzata Nabrdalik, Patrycja Hendel, Alicja Kolasa-Więcek and Ewa Moliszewska *Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
Overall the MS "Trait variation between two wild specimens of Pleurotus os-2 treatus and their progeny in the context of usefulness in nematode control "can be accepted for after some minor correction. The detailed comments are mentioned in the pdf copy. Genus name should be in italics. Authors used NTSYS software to draw phylogenetic tree however, I think it is used for dendrogram analysis. In page 5 authors have written something related to Discussion which is incomplete and needs to be checked.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Answer - All suggestions given by Reviewer 1 were adopted and used to improve the text. Direct answers were given in the comment boxes of the manuscript. We would like to point out that all Latin names were written in italics in the originally submitted manuscript.
The sentence highlighted on page 5 is not a part of the manuscript, it seems an Editorial comment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper titled "Trait variation between two wild specimens of Pleurotus ostreatus and their progeny in the context of usefulness in nematode control" showed the potential use of mycelia in the control of nematodes.
Minor revision:
1. Figures, all the experiments were performed without biological repeats, at least three of the biological repeats are needed, also error bar needs to be added.
2. line 331-333, what's the meaning of nematode movement? How to measure (quantify) this movement? By velocity or other parameters? needs more data.
3. PO1 and PO2 grow in the same medium, how to select the cross line PO1*PO2? Is there obvious growth phenotype? Or is the mycelia looks different? Needs some image to show this.
Author Response
- Figures, all the experiments were performed without biological repeats, at least three of the biological repeats are needed, also error bar needs to be added.
Answer - We used repeats in our test, f. ex. Line 133 – “The tests were per formed in triplicate”
Line 107 – “in five slides which were treated as 107 experimental repetitions”
However, for other tests we used replications, and this information was avoided in the main text, so this was included as a correction.
- line 331-333, what's the meaning of nematode movement? How to measure (quantify) this movement? By velocity or other parameters? needs more data.
Answer - Caenorhabditis elegans nematodes when are alive and in a good condition, always move, which means they do not stay in the same position with any moment, there is always move/motion/activity, so as it was described in the methods, we observed the body motion. Paralyzed nematodes stopped showing any motions, and before they completely stop they show slowed-down motions. The way of observations and measurement was described in the methods. We have used visual quantification based on nematode body behavior.
- PO1 and PO2 grow in the same medium, how to select the cross line PO1*PO2? Is there obvious growth phenotype? Or is the mycelia looks different? Needs some image to show this.
Answer - Crosses were selected according to classical mycological methods. Heterokaryons are easily distinguished by the presence of clump connections, which are absent in parental monokaryons, and also heterokaryons are more fluffy which makes them quite easy to see and separate from crossed mycelia.
We have added the illustrative picture to the supplementary materials.
The Introduction was changed, however, we are not sure if this will be adequate for the Reviewer’s feelings.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors present here showed the lethal capabilities of two strains of the edible fungus Pleurotus ostreatus and their progeny against the model nematode Ceanorhabditis elegans, which will be useful for in-vitro control of nematodes. However, some data in this article were not solid to draw conclusions. For example, the Figure 3 and 4 should be added the significant differences analysis. In order to better understand the toxicity of mycelium to the C. elegan, photos should be used for showing the mycelia to form hyphal knobs in the presence of C. elegans. Furthermore, It is best to add subheadings in the results section. The writing of references is not normal and all Latins in the MS need to be written in italics. For these reasons, I feel it is not appropriate for this journal's readership.
Author Response
However, some data in this article were not solid to draw conclusions. For example, the Figure 3 and 4 should be added the significant differences analysis.
Answer – SD were added.
In order to better understand the toxicity of mycelium to the C. elegans, photos should be used for showing the mycelia to form hyphal knobs in the presence of C. elegans.
Answer - The pictures are added to the supplementary materials.
Furthermore, It is best to add subheadings in the results section.
Answer - Subheadings are added in the part Results.
The writing of references is not normal and all Latins in the MS need to be written in italics.
Answer - In the originally submitted manuscript, all Latin names were given in italics. The corrected text has Latin names in italics.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
This reviewer has no major reservation about the current version of the manuscript.
