Review History


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.

View examples of open peer review.

Summary

  • The initial submission of this article was received on March 19th, 2015 and was peer-reviewed by 2 reviewers and the Academic Editor.
  • The article was Accepted by the Academic Editor on April 13th, 2015.

Version 0.1 (accepted)

· Apr 13, 2015 · Academic Editor

Accept

Dear Dr. Delphia,

Two experts in the field have carefully reviewed your manuscript. After a thorough review, I’m pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication. Thank you for your fine contribution.

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

No Comments

Experimental design

No Comments

Validity of the findings

No Comments

Additional comments

This is an excellent article on the physiology of an important native pollinator. The authors have done a stellar job in terms of both experimental design and scientific reporting. Further studies will be needed to fully assess the effects of wing wear and lipid stores on ovarian development and bee reproductive success, but this manuscript is an important first step to launch future research.

Reviewer 2 ·

Basic reporting

No comments

Experimental design

No comments

Validity of the findings

No comments

Additional comments

The manuscript by O'Neill et al., describes how changes the wing wear, lipid content and oocyte size of M. rotundata, in order to correlate them with reproductive performance and the fitness in a field of an important "solitary bee pollinated crop", alfalfa.

Based on the results, beside the normal and always present environmental factors, as for example wheather or food source, a number of not completely controllable seasonal factors are present and can affects the performance of the pollinators. Indeed, there was a negative correlation between wing wear and oocyte size.

This study, in my opinion, can add more and interesting information about this pollinator to take into account for its managment for pollination service, even if is not in deep understood the degree of seasonal changes that can affect fitness and performances.

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.