All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
The paper has been revised well; thank you for you attention to detail. I am pleased to accept this work and move it into production!
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Patricia Gandini, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
I have heard back from the same two reviewers, and only minor, mainly typographical errors remain. I imagine you will be able resubmit soon, and look forward to seeing your new version.
Thank you for sending the modified manuscript.
I added some modifications in 'References'.
no comment
no comment
no comment
some minor typographical edits required
Ok
all Ok
just some minor corrections required
I have heard back from two reviewers, both of whom were positive about your work. At the same time, they have both offered numerous constructive comments that will help you make your work better. Please consider each comment carefully. As well, please ensure the English is up to international scientific standards.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Please ensure that all review comments are addressed in a rebuttal letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate. It is a common mistake to address reviewer questions in the rebuttal letter but not in the revised manuscript. If a reviewer raised a question then your readers will probably have the same question so you should ensure that the manuscript can stand alone without the rebuttal letter. Directions on how to prepare a rebuttal letter can be found at: https://peerj.com/benefits/academic-rebuttal-letters/ #]
[# PeerJ Staff Note: The review process has identified that the English language must be improved. PeerJ can provide language editing services - please contact us at editorial.support@peerj.com for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title) #]
This study reviewed the genus Marphysa of South Africa based on morphological characters and molecular information. I think that the manuscript is suitable for publication in an international journal. This is the first step for the conservation of local species in South Africa.
Some modifications are needed before accepting the manuscript.
1. The figures of pectinate chaetae and other chaetae are needed to replace. Authors use the pectinate chaetae for diagnostic characters, but the pectinate chaetae in the figures are hard to see the characters. The SEM photographs or line drawings are needed for them. Line drawings of parapodia are also helpful for understanding the diagnostic characteristics.
2. Indicating previous records in figure 1 helps to understand the distribution and taxonomic position of collected samples for readers.
3. Also, the key to species or comparative table of Marphysa in South Africa helps accurate identification for readers.
4. I recommend adding Maximum Likelihood tree.
5. In the remarks section of M. haemasoma, authors should add a paragraph for morphological comparison and explanation of taxonomic treatment between M. haemasoma and M. elityeni. Additionally, photographs of M. elityeni support comparing both species.
6. There are many typographical errors.
Best regards.
no comment
no comment
no comment
The paper needs to be carefully checked by the English native speakers amongst the authors
have made changes throughout and some globals are required
not an experimental study
good study and nice images - just need to tighten up text and also the puncutuation of the synonymies
see my comments on the atteched pdf
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.