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.
Dear Author(s) I found your contribution entitled as "Effectiveness of Bacillus subtilis ANT01 and Rhizobium sp. 11B on the control of fusarium wilt in pineapple (Ananas comosus)" very informative and useful for the research community. I am pleased to recommend the acceptance of the manuscript.
The manuscript is clear and unambiguous. But some minor correction is necessary before publication.
Experimental design has been clearly defined. Only it is requested to write 'Soil population of Fusarium' in place of F. oxysporum. As morphologically it is very difficult to differentiate F. oxysporum from other Fusarium species.
The data is novel; only in Table 6, the predicted value is sound misleading. Please justify properly.
Dear Author(s),
My greetings. I appreciate your manuscript "Effectiveness of Bacillus subtilis ANT01 and Rhizobium sp. 11B on the control of fusarium wilt in pineapple (Ananas comosus)". Reviewers provided nice reviews and comments on your manuscript. Please incorporate all the suggestions.
With Best Regards
Ravindra Kumar
**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review, editorial, and staff comments are addressed in a response letter and that any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate.
The manuscript entitled ''Effectiveness of Bacillus subtilis ANT01 and Rhizobium sp. 11B on the control of fusarium wilt in pineapple (Ananas comosus)" clearly depicts the beneficial effect of bioagents for managing fusarium wilt in pineapple. Overall, the presentation is good, and the English is very much understandable. The structure of the manuscript is nicely presented with an appropriate number of figures and tables.
The experiments are meticulously performed with original research that meets the scope of the journal. The statistical analysis was done nicely but needs more clarification or explanation for the overall improvement of the paper. The research question is addressed properly to find out the existing knowledge gaps. Methods were performed with replication and described properly. Overall, the manuscript looks suitable for publication with a few modifications noted in the attached file
The finding is novel and has an impact on disease management. The data was robust, and statistically sound but some points need to be addressed as asked in the manuscript.
Few questions are required to be addressed for the improvement of the manuscript:
1. Is it possible to isolate and quantify pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum (specifically) from soil samples using Rose Bengal- PDA media? What about other contaminants as well as non-pathogenic fusaria? Please cite references if any.
2. The methodology for correlation or regression analysis should be mentioned in detail in the methodology section for better presentation of data.
3. In some cases, the value of the coefficient of determination is too low. A strong relationship can not be justified with these. Please justify.
4. In some tables, some values were mentioned. Please denote the nature or type of values (either coefficient values or something else)
Language is clear , easy to understand, technically correct.
Literature references are cited nicely.
It is relevant topic with recent information
Experimental design is appropriate according to study
It is relevant topic with valid findings
Discussion part of this work is explained nicely. Some alignment correction is needed in tables.
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.