The Potential of Adjuvants Used with Microbiological Control of Insect Pests with Emphasis on Organic Farming

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Editors and Authors,

The authors present an excellent review of the use of adjuvants in microbial pest control. The review is succinct and quite enlightening. However, in several fragments, the review is directed to cases of the European Union and, more specifically, Poland. Considering the article's title, the journal's scope and the special issue, the review approach should be expanded to the global situation. An example is present in the abstract, as scored below. Therefore, the article should be revised, taking into account the considerations below and also providing an English language review of the entire manuscript:

Abstract – "Biological plant protection is a crucial component of integrated pest management strategies that have been implemented in the European Union (EU) since 2014."

Considering that the magazine Agricultura is international and with an extensive scope within the area, it would be essential to start the summary with a sentence that deals with the topic under review in a global way.

As biopesticide adjuvants are a central theme of the review, a brief explanation of what adjuvants are and their primary function would be appropriate in the abstract.

L39-42 - An element is missing that links the ideas present in this fragment of the text.

Table 2: It is recommended that authors provide more details on the taxonomy of Cordyceps fumosoroseus, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus and Isaria fumosorosea.

L380, 387, 390, 401 - Why do the authors start these paragraphs by citing the reference numbers in square brackets? It is an unusual form of citation.

L390-400 - Does the oil interfere with the gas exchange process of these and other insects?

A professional English-speaking proofreader would help in better understanding the review proposal.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

We would like to thank the Reviewer for valuable comments and suggestions. Below are the explanations.

 Point 1: Line 9-10. Considering that the magazine Agricultura is international and with an extensive scope within the area, it would be essential to start the summary with a sentence that deals with the topic under review in a global way.

Response 1: The first sentence in the summary has been changed and a part of the sentence has been deleted (“that have been implemented in the European Union (EU) since 2014”)

Present form - “Biological plant protection is a crucial component of integrated pest management strategies.”

Point 2: Line 9-24. As biopesticide adjuvants are a central theme of the review, a brief explanation of what adjuvants are and their primary function would be appropriate in the abstract.

Response 2: Following the suggestion, we have added in the abstract an explanation of what adjuvants are and their primary function.

“The enhancement of their efficacy may be accomplished through the use of adjuvants. Adjuvants are substances incorporated into plant protection products, including microbial insecticides, or used alone to enhance their effectiveness. They can play a pivotal role in improving the performance of mycoinsecticides by ensuring better coverage on plant surfaces and increasing the likelihood of successful pest control, thereby contributing to the overall success of biological methods of pest control.”

Point 3: Line 39-42. An element is missing that links the ideas present in this fragment of the text.

Response 3: This sentence has been rewritten to be more clear.

“Reducing the reliance on chemical plant protection products is crucial to mitigate the risks of environmental pollution, biodiversity depletion, and the development of pest resistance to chemical substances [11].”

 Point 4: Line 151-153. Table 1 and 2. , now line 83-86. It is recommended that authors provide more details on the taxonomy of Cordyceps fumosoroseus, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus and Isaria fumosorosea.

Response 4: We have provided more details on the taxonomy of Cordyceps fumosoroseus, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus, and Isaria fumosorosea based on Taxonomy Browser.

 Point 5: Line 380, 387, 390, 401. Why do the authors start these paragraphs by citing the reference numbers in square brackets? It is an unusual form of citation.

Response 5: We have changed the form of citation at the beginning of a sentence.

Point 6: Line 390-400. Does the oil interfere with the gas exchange process of these and other insects?

Response 6: The following text has been added in line 290-297:

“Nevertheless, it is essential to recognize that oils assume a pivotal role in plant protection strategies. Notably, oils serve as insecticides, effectively targeting a range of soft-bodied insect pests, such as mites, aphids, whiteflies, thrips, mealybugs, and scale insects. They can effectively target the egg stage of insects by either disrupting the normal exchange of gases through the egg surface or interfering with the egg’s structural integrity. When used against other stages of insects, oils have the capacity to obstruct the respiratory system, leading to suffocation or breakdown of the insect’s cuticle.”

Reviewer 2 Report

General comments

P3; L129.- Add “entomopathogen” before nematodes.

P4, L155.- Place between substance incorporated “natural or synthetic origin.”

P4, L156.- Delete “or added to the sprayer tank”

P4; L159-160. Delete the last two paragraphs.

P4, L155-193.- The section 3. Adjuvants for Biopesticides is the word “adjuvants” is used repetitively or indiscriminately. Reduce the number of times it is mentioned.

P7; L264.- Delete “on the other hand”.

P7; L264-277.- They should strengthen the text of this part, only considered a bibliographical reference.

P7; L275-276.- Include an example where it has been applied and against which pest.

P8. L324.- Include the scientific name of the yerba mate.

 Other suggestion:

Is desirable that the authors add a figure so that the text is not so heavy to read and follow.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

First of all, the authors would like to express their gratitude to the Reviewer for the comprehensive assessment of our work, along with the valuable remarks and suggestions provided. We have diligently taken into account all of the comments and recommended changes in the manuscript. Below, we provide explanations for each of these changes.

Point 1: Line 129. Add “entomopathogen” before nematodes.

Response 1: We have added “entomopathogen” before nematodes.

Point 2: Line 155. Place between substance incorporated “natural or synthetic origin.”

Response 2: We have changed “substances incorporated” to “substances of natural or synthetic origin incorporated”, but we added also information that it is possible to use of the adjuvants together with PPPs in case where adjuvants are not incorporated within composition of PPPs.

 Point 3: Line 156. Delete “or added to the sprayer tank”

Response 3: We have deleted “or added to the sprayer tank”.

Point 4: Line 159-160. Delete the last two paragraphs.

Response 4: We have deleted the last sentences in the paragraph.

 Point 5: Line 155-193. The section 3. Adjuvants for Biopesticides is the word “adjuvants” is used repetitively or indiscriminately. Reduce the number of times it is mentioned.”.

Response 5: We have reduced the number of times the word "adjuvants" is used in this section.

Point 6: Line 264. Delete “on the other hand”.

Response 6: We have deleted “on the other hand”.

 Point 7: Line 264-277. They should strengthen the text of this part, only considered a bibliographical reference.

Response 7: The text of this part has been improved.

Point 8: Line 275-276. Include an example where it has been applied and against which pest.

Response 8: We have revised the sentence to provide a more comprehensive explanation of this aspect.

 Point 9: Line 324. Include the scientific name of the yerba mate.

Response 9: We have added the scientific name of the yerba mate – Ilex paraguariensis St.-Hil.

Point 10: Is desirable that the authors add a figure so that the text is not so heavy to read and follow.

Response 10: Thank you for your suggestion. After careful consideration, we have decided not to include the scheme in the article. The current text covers the topic extensively, making it superfluous to add a figure. We believe that extensive content effectively communicates the topic. Moreover, bringing together the three topics – adjuvates, mycoinsecticides and organic farming – in one clear picture is particularly difficult and can be more complicated than just reading. Nevertheless, the authors will keep this suggestion in mind and will try to develop such a scheme in the next upcoming research paper on this topic.