Related articles by
Research Idea
Research Ideas and Outcomes 9: e96744
https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.9.e96744 (07 Mar 2023)
https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.9.e96744 (07 Mar 2023)
- ContentsContents
- Article InfoArticle Info
- CiteCite
- MetricsMetrics
- CommentComment
- RelatedRelated
- TaxaTaxa
- DataData
- RefsRefs
- CitedCited
- NanopubsNanopubs
- Reviews2Reviews
Nikoleta Soulioti
Citation:
Soulioti N (2024) Review of: Towards a global sentinel plants research strategy to prevent new introductions of non-native pests and pathogens in forests. The experience of HOMED. Research Ideas and Outcomes 9: e96744.
doi: 10.3897/rio.9.e96744.r391339
Review Form
Questions & Answers
Does the manuscript conform to the focus and scope of this journal? | Yes |
Does the manuscript contain unpublishable, for example fraudulent or pseudoscience, content? | No |
Do the title, abstract and keywords accurately reflect the contents and data? | Yes |
Is the manuscript written in grammatically and stylistically correct English? | Yes |
Does the manuscript contain sufficiently detailed information to merit publication? | Yes |
Are the methods relevant to the study and adequately described? | Moderately |
Did the authors cite most of the literature pertinent to the subject? | Yes |
Are all relevant non-textual data and media (data sets, audio and video files, data from which graphs are produced) available as either supplementary files to the manuscript or through links to external repositories? | Moderately |
In case data are deposited elsewhere, are they available openly, and do the links to these resolve correctly? | N/A |
Are the data consistent, properly recorded internally and described using applicable standards (e.g. in terms of file formats, file names, units and metadata)? | Yes |
Are the conclusions supported by the data? | Yes |
If applicable, are taxonomic and nomenclatural novelties compliant to the respective biological Code? | N/A |
Are the illustrations of sufficient quality? | Yes |
Are conflicts of interest, relevant permissions and other ethical issues addressed in an appropriate manner? | Yes |
Notes
The paper is well written, discussing the advanced concept of a running EU Horizon project in the field of plant protection. The authors have reviewed thoroughly their subject and present well supported data. The inclusion of all different plant schemes/ages of trees is giving a high advantage in the research implication of the method as an important early detection and prevention tool for the scientific community in plant protection and policy makers. Thus, I support its publication with some minor corrections, given as comments in the main text and supplementary material.
I've reviewed this manuscript and support its publication after revision
Subscribe to email alerts for current Article's categories