Epidemiology of Mycosphaerella Leaf Spot and Powdery Mildew and Agronomic Parameters of Strawberry Cultivars and Genotypes in the Highland Region of Southern Brazil

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript describes the Epidemiology of mycosphaerella leaf spot and powdery mildew and agronomic parameters of strawberry cultivars and genotypes in the highland region of southern Brazil. Although, the authors evaluate the resistance of strawberry to MLS and PM and quantitative and qualitative FAP under the edaphoclimatic conditions of the highland region of Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil during the 2019/20 and 2020/21 growing seasons. In my opinion, the manuscript requires more data to support the results, and the structure also need improving before publish:

Line 21-29: There were too many descriptions of methods in the abstract, and more of your experimental results and conclusions should be provided here.

Line 30-34: Based on the description of your material and methods, I think the strawberry disease resistance and quality are not the same samples. So, you need to make it clear here. And Irma, Bellalinda, Kiara, Jonica, and Pircinque have good resistance to MLS and PM, what is their fruit quality and yield during pathogen infection?

Line 39-93: I think the introduction of research on strawberry disease resistant germplasm needs to be added to this section, as there should be a lot of references on the evaluation of MLS and PM resistant germplasm.

Line 95-201: This part is too bad, there's no logical arrangement and it's confusing to read. I would suggest that you need to reorganize and put each of the measurements by setting up titles, and then it will be easy for following. Background information of experimental germplasm should be provided here, e.g., where it came from, what the parent parentage, and ploidies.

Line 203-215: I don't think this part is the result of the experiment, this part should be your experimental conditions.

Line 220-237: Please provide photos of leaf spot phenotypes of each strawberry cultivars and genotypes at the 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 day after the first appearance of symptoms. And the data of incidence, disease index and spot size at the 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 day after the first appearance of symptoms should also be analyzed here.

Line 299-310: This study aimed to evaluate the resistance of cultivars and genotypes to MLS and PM and quantitative and qualitative FAP under the edaphoclimatic conditions of the highland region of Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil during the 2019/20 and 2020/21 growing seasons. So, I think the authors should pay more attention on the changes in yield and quality of strawberry varieties after they are susceptible to the disease, so that the ones screened are the ones that are resistant to the disease and have good quality under such conditions. And the photos of fruit of each strawberry cultivars and genotypes during the appearance of symptoms should be provide.

Since temperature and humidity affect the quality and disease resistance of strawberries, I suggest that the authors can analyses the correlation between temperature, humidity and the quality and disease resistance of strawberries to see if they can come up with a reasonable planting time of strawberry on the highland region of Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil.

Author Response

REVIEWER 1

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript describes the Epidemiology of mycosphaerella leaf spot and powdery mildew and agronomic parameters of strawberry cultivars and genotypes in the highland region of southern Brazil. Although, the authors evaluate the resistance of strawberry to MLS and PM and quantitative and qualitative FAP under the edaphoclimatic conditions of the highland region of Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil during the 2019/20 and 2020/21 growing seasons. In my opinion, the manuscript requires more data to support the results, and the structure also need improving before publish:

Line 21-29: There were too many descriptions of methods in the abstract, and more of your experimental results and conclusions should be provided here.

Response: We deleted some methodology information.

Line 30-34: Based on the description of your material and methods, I think the strawberry disease resistance and quality are not the same samples. So, you need to make it clear here. And Irma, Bellalinda, Kiara, Jonica, and Pircinque have good resistance to MLS and PM, what is their fruit quality and yield during pathogen infection?

Response: We have rewritten the ABSTRACT and added the requested information. The 250-word limit is a barrier to including additional details. 

Line 39-93: I think the introduction of research on strawberry disease resistant germplasm needs to be added to this section, as there should be a lot of references on the evaluation of MLS and PM resistant germplasm.

Response: We added germplasm information as requested.

Line 95-201: This part is too bad, there's no logical arrangement and it's confusing to read. I would suggest that you need to reorganize and put each of the measurements by setting up titles, and then it will be easy for following. Background information of experimental germplasm should be provided here, e.g., where it came from, what the parent parentage, and ploidies.

Response: We divided in sub-titles and added germplasm information.

Line 203-215: I don't think this part is the result of the experiment, this part should be your experimental conditions.

Response: We understand that this paragraph discusses the environmental data used to explain and justify the minimal oscillation in environmental conditions between the two growing seasons and to elucidate the conditions for disease infection. In the last 20-30 articles on disease epidemiology that we have published in prominent plant pathology journals such as Crop Protection, Plant Disease, and Scientia Horticulturae, this type of data has served as introductory information to justify the interaction between disease and environment.

Line 220-237: Please provide photos of leaf spot phenotypes of each strawberry cultivars and genotypes at the 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 day after the first appearance of symptoms. And the data of incidence, disease index and spot size at the 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 day after the first appearance of symptoms should also be analyzed here.

Response: We are presenting the photos of the cultivars and genotypes. The two epidemiological parameters, Area Under Incidence Progress Curve (AUIPC) and Area Under Severity Progress Curve (AUSPC), were calculated based on the sum of individual incidence and severity during the five evaluation periods. These parameters are the best for determining disease progression over time. The objective was not to present the individual incidence and severity at each specific time. ANOVA was performed based on these two parameters, and PCA was conducted to adjust the epidemiological parameters with the quantitative and qualitative fruit agronomic parameters (FAP). If the goal was only to evaluate disease epidemiology without FAP in the principal component analysis (PCA), we could have included other parameters such as the onset of symptoms, time to reach maximum incidence, and time to reach maximum severity. Our purpose was to compare and understand the relationship between MLS and PM resistance and fruit quality. For this relationship, AUIPC and AUSPC were the appropriate epidemiological parameters to use in PCA with fruit quality.

Line 299-310: This study aimed to evaluate the resistance of cultivars and genotypes to MLS and PM and quantitative and qualitative FAP under the edaphoclimatic conditions of the highland region of Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil during the 2019/20 and 2020/21 growing seasons. So, I think the authors should pay more attention on the changes in yield and quality of strawberry varieties after they are susceptible to the disease, so that the ones screened are the ones that are resistant to the disease and have good quality under such conditions. And the photos of fruit of each strawberry cultivars and genotypes during the appearance of symptoms should be provide.

Response: The photos of the strawberry material have been added. The idea was to examine the relationship between disease resistance and fruit agronomic parameters (FAP). We first performed an ANOVA for disease epidemiology and then a PCA to demonstrate that some materials are better than others. Despite their good disease resistance, these materials also produce high-quality fruit.

Since temperature and humidity affect the quality and disease resistance of strawberries, I suggest that the authors can analyses the correlation between temperature, humidity and the quality and disease resistance of strawberries to see if they can come up with a reasonable planting time of strawberry on the highland region of Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil.

Response: The suggestion is quite relevant, and additional experiments are underway to include more growing seasons. The environmental conditions presented during the two growing seasons were chosen to demonstrate stability, with favorable weather conditions for disease incidence and severity. For this type of analysis, we need to add data from at least two more growing seasons to build a comprehensive plan in our edaphoclimatic conditions. The idea for a future paper is to propose a long-term disease infection conditions plan and a weather forecast prediction formula.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript “Epidemiology of mycosphaerella leaf spot and powdery mildew and agronomic parameters of strawberry cultivars and genotypes in the highland region of southern Brazil” reveals a comprehensive study addressing the resistance of strawberry cultivars and genotypes to major diseases and their agronomic performance. However, data is interesting and useful, but this manuscript is written in very casual way and need to be intensively revised. This manuscript is required to be re-reviewed after revision if editors are agreed upon. The major concern are:

Abstract

#The first line of the abstract should not start with like ………………many factors, such as the lack of cultivars adapted to different growing.

#The abstract should provide a concise overview of the study's objectives, methodology, and key findings, which is lacking in this manuscript.

#AUIDPC and AUSDPC should be expanded in the abstract and introduction then, only can they be used as an abbreviations. The authors can also mention the practical implications of the findings for strawberry cultivation.

Introduction

# The introduction should be divided into two or three paragraphs; in the manuscript, it is written in many small paragraphs.

# Moreover, it should be focused on detailed background on the significance of mycosphaerella leaf spot (MLS) and powdery mildew (PM) in strawberry cultivation overall, particularly in the highland region of southern Brazil.

# The major research gap should be identified and a clearer statement of the research gap and the study's contribution to existing knowledge should be included in the introduction.

# The introduction could benefit from citing recent literature on diseases taken in the study.

Materials and methods

#The methodology is well-described, detailing the evaluation of disease incidence and severity and the agronomic parameters.

#The choice of biweekly evaluations and specific diagrammatic scales for disease assessment is appropriate.

#The statistical methods, including analysis of variance and multivariate analysis using PCA, are suitable for the data analysis.

#However, methodology should be organized in headings and subheadings with clear and crisp descriptions in a systematic manner. More details on the experimental design, such as the number of replicates and the randomization process, would enhance the reproducibility of the study.

#The Scott–Knott test is mentioned for pairwise mean comparisons, but additional information on why this test was chosen over others (e.g., Tukey's HSD) would be beneficial.

Results

#The results section is comprehensive, presenting detailed findings on disease incidence and severity and agronomic parameters.

#The use of AUIDPC and AUSDPC is appropriate for assessing disease progress.

#The results are clearly presented, but including more visual aids, such as graphs and charts, could help better understand the data.

Discussion

#The discussion effectively interprets the findings, relating them to the study's objectives and existing literature.

#The implications of the results for strawberry breeding and cultivation practices in southern Brazil are well-articulated.

#However, the discussion could be strengthened by addressing potential limitations of the study, such as environmental factors that might have influenced disease incidence and severity.

#Suggestions for future research directions would also add value to the manuscript.

Conclusion

#The conclusion summarizes the key findings and their practical implications. It would be helpful to include specific recommendations for growers based on the study's results.

References

The manuscript should ensure that all relevant recent studies are cited to provide a comprehensive background and context for the research.

Lastly, I would recommend that some areas benefit from additional detail and clarity, particularly in the introduction and methodology sections. Including more visual aids in the results section would enhance the presentation of data. Addressing potential limitations and suggesting future research directions in the discussion would strengthen the manuscript.

 

In summary, this manuscript presents valuable findings on the resistance of strawberry cultivars and genotypes to MLS and PM and their agronomic performance in southern Brazil. With some revisions and enhancements, it has the potential to make a significant contribution to the field.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

REVIEWER 2

Abstract

#The first line of the abstract should not start with like ………………many factors, such as the lack of cultivars adapted to different growing.

Response: We have rewritten the ABSTRACT and added the requested information. The 250-word limit is a barrier to including additional details. 

#The abstract should provide a concise overview of the study's objectives, methodology, and key findings, which is lacking in this manuscript.

Response: We have rewritten the ABSTRACT and INTRODUCTION and added the requested information. The 250-word limit is a barrier to including additional details.

#AUIDPC and AUSDPC should be expanded in the abstract and introduction then, only can they be used as an abbreviations. The authors can also mention the practical implications of the findings for strawberry cultivation.

Response: We have rewritten the ABSTRACT and INTRODUCTION and added the requested information. The 250-word limit is a barrier to including additional details.

Introduction

# The introduction should be divided into two or three paragraphs; in the manuscript, it is written in many small paragraphs.

RESPONSE: We have restructured the Introduction.

# Moreover, it should be focused on detailed background on the significance of mycosphaerella leaf spot (MLS) and powdery mildew (PM) in strawberry cultivation overall, particularly in the highland region of southern Brazil.

RESPONSE: We have restructured the Introduction.

# The major research gap should be identified and a clearer statement of the research gap and the study's contribution to existing knowledge should be included in the introduction.

RESPONSE: We have restructured the Introduction.

# The introduction could benefit from citing recent literature on diseases taken in the study.

RESPONSE: We tried to include the most recent literature relevant to the specific subject.

Materials and methods

#The methodology is well-described, detailing the evaluation of disease incidence and severity and the agronomic parameters.

#The choice of biweekly evaluations and specific diagrammatic scales for disease assessment is appropriate.

#The statistical methods, including analysis of variance and multivariate analysis using PCA, are suitable for the data analysis.

#However, methodology should be organized in headings and subheadings with clear and crisp descriptions in a systematic manner. More details on the experimental design, such as the number of replicates and the randomization process, would enhance the reproducibility of the study.

REPSONSE: Agree and we did it.

#The Scott–Knott test is mentioned for pairwise mean comparisons, but additional information on why this test was chosen over others (e.g., Tukey's HSD) would be beneficial.

RESPONSE: The choice of the Scott-Knott test over Tukey's HSD or other methods can be justified based on its control of error rates, hierarchical clustering approach, increased power and sensitivity, better interpretability of results, flexibility, and ability to minimize false discoveries. These characteristics make the Scott-Knott test a robust and reliable choice for pairwise mean comparisons in various experimental contexts.

Results

#The results section is comprehensive, presenting detailed findings on disease incidence and severity and agronomic parameters.

#The use of AUIDPC and AUSDPC is appropriate for assessing disease progress.

#The results are clearly presented, but including more visual aids, such as graphs and charts, could help better understand the data.

RESPONSE: We believe that the three figures and two tables presented regarding the ANOVA and PCA data clearly show the significant effect of cultivar and genotype resistance to MLS and PM, combined with the fruit agronomic parameters. Additional graphs or charts would only repeat some of the existing data.

Discussion

#The discussion effectively interprets the findings, relating them to the study's objectives and existing literature.

#The implications of the results for strawberry breeding and cultivation practices in southern Brazil are well-articulated.

 

#However, the discussion could be strengthened by addressing potential limitations of the study, such as environmental factors that might have influenced disease incidence and severity.

RESPONSE: The environmental conditions in southern Brazil are extremely favorable to MLS and PM infection. One of the objectives was to evaluate the performance of cultivars and genotypes under these conditions. The environmental pressure is constant and present throughout the entire growing season. The data aim to show the level of disease resistance combined with agronomic parameters of the fruit.

#Suggestions for future research directions would also add value to the manuscript.

Conclusion

#The conclusion summarizes the key findings and their practical implications. It would be helpful to include specific recommendations for growers based on the study's results.

References

The manuscript should ensure that all relevant recent studies are cited to provide a comprehensive background and context for the research.

Lastly, I would recommend that some areas benefit from additional detail and clarity, particularly in the introduction and methodology sections. Including more visual aids in the results section would enhance the presentation of data. Addressing potential limitations and suggesting future research directions in the discussion would strengthen the manuscript.

RESPONSE: We made additional revisions and believe the final version incorporates all suggestions.

In summary, this manuscript presents valuable findings on the resistance of strawberry cultivars and genotypes to MLS and PM and their agronomic performance in southern Brazil. With some revisions and enhancements, it has the potential to make a significant contribution to the field.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

There are many improvements in the manuscript after revision, but with the available data I don't think it's enough to support their conclusions. Firstly, I think that continuous incidence data or pictures are necessary to add. This is because it would give us a clear understanding of the incidence of each species under that condition. Secondly, the authors still did not clarify the yield differences of these resistant varieties after infection compared to non-infected plants. If resistant varieties show significant yield loss after infection, although they may be better than susceptible varieties, then these germplasm remain of little value for utilization.

Author Response

Reviewer: There are many improvements in the manuscript after revision, but with the available data I don't think it's enough to support their conclusions. Firstly, I think that continuous incidence data or pictures are necessary to add. This is because it would give us a clear understanding of the incidence of each species under that condition.

RESPONSE: All suggestions were added in RED COLLOR for easy identification of the tex in the new version, and a Table with MLS and PM incidence and severity of all evaluated strawberry material was included.

Reviewer: Secondly, the authors still did not clarify the yield differences of these resistant varieties after infection compared to non-infected plants.

RESPONSE: We compared the fruit agronomic parameters among the cultivars and genotypes grew in open field. We did not compared them with control plot, because it does not exist. All experiments were conducted in open fields with natural diseases inoculum that occurs endemically. All materials were compared and contrasted among themselves, not against a control plot. To maintain a control plot without natural inoculum, we would need to keep this plot in a tunnel or greenhouse, which would create different conditions from all other treatments. Under such conditions, analysis and evaluation could not be performed due to the differing environmental conditions.

Reviewer:  If resistant varieties show significant yield loss after infection, although they may be better than susceptible varieties, then these germplasm remain of little value for utilization.

RESPONSE: we added additional text and made comments in red.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have incorporated or addressed all my suggestions and therefore I recommend this manuscript for its publication in Agriculture.

Author Response

Reviewer: The authors have incorporated or addressed all my suggestions and therefore I recommend this manuscript for its publication in Agriculture.

RESPONSE: we really appreciated your concern in accept it for publication.