Changes in Population Densities and Species Richness of Pollinators in the Carpathian Basin during the Last 50 Years (Hymenoptera, Diptera, Lepidoptera)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI have reviewed manuscript diversity-3002799 entitled “Changes in population densities and species richness of pollinators in the Carpathian Basin during the last 50 years (Hymenoptera, Diptera, Lepidoptera)” in which the Authors present long-term changes in populations of main pollinator groups in an extensive geographical region of Central Europe.
This paper provides valuable results related to the decrease of pollinator communities and a global pollinator crisis as well as indicates the direction of changes in native insect species diversity in the area studied.
The manuscript is generally clear and presented in a well-structured manner. The figures and tables are appropriate. However, in my opinion, some modifications are needed before a possible publication:
1. Introduction section - I suggest adding short information about type of climate changes noted in the studied area during the period of collecting data
2. Discussion section.- In my opinion, the Authors overuse direct quotations from cited works – see lines 614-624, 637-641, 665-669, 687-688, 691-694, 702-703, 710-712, 755-763, 793-799, 802-808.
2. All sections – Latin names of species and genera should be written in Italic - please correct it across a whole text including Tables
3. Authors should double-check and correct numbering of Tables and cited papers across the text and References. The numbering should be consistent with the order of citation in the text, but this is not the case. For example, Table 13 is cited for the first time directly after the Table 8 but before Tables 12, 9, 10 (lines 440-473). Papers numbered in References 72-79 and 82-98 are cited in the text after paper numbered 106 or 102.
4. Figures should be corrected as they are not self-informative due to lack of titles of axes and units (Figures 1-4).
More specific comments are placed directly in the text
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your time and energy dedicated to our work titled Changes in population densities and species richness of pollinators in the Carpathian Basin during the last 50 years (Hymenoptera, Diptera, Lepidoptera). Also, we are grateful for your comments and suggestions that improve the quality of our paper.
In the following, we will discuss point-by-point how we corrected our manuscript following your advice.
1. "Introduction section - I suggest adding short information about type of climate changes noted in the studied area during the period of collecting data"
All the requested climatic information was added, and we completed it with one climatic chart and one table showing the changes and tendencies of the last 50 years. Also, we completed the manuscript with a figure marking the place of captures of lepidoptera (Hymenoptera and Diptera was impossible since they have approx 1 200 sampling places in the last 50 years).
2. "Discussion section.- In my opinion, the Authors overuse direct quotations from cited works – see lines 614-624, 637-641, 665-669, 687-688, 691-694, 702-703, 710-712, 755-763, 793-799, 802-808."
All not necessary quotations are cancelled. Also, we completed the discussion section with 7 new referneces comparing our results from the Carpathian Basin with other regions of the Earth.
3. "All sections – Latin names of species and genera should be written in Italic - please correct it across a whole text including Tables"
All species and generic names are corrected and written in italic.
4. "Authors should double-check and correct the numbering of tables and cited papers across the text and references. The numbering should be consistent with the order of citation in the text, but this is not the case. For example, Table 13 is cited for the first time directly after the Table 8 but before Tables 12, 9, 10 (lines 440-473). Papers numbered in References 72-79 and 82-98 are cited in the text after paper numbered 106 or 102."
The order of references was corrected and re-enumerated.
5. "Figures should be corrected as they are not self-informative due to lack of titles of axes and units (Figures 1-4)".
All axes are completed. Titles are under the chrats, according to the specifications of the journal. We added two new figures as well.
Last Saturday, our coauthor, Dr. Sándor Tóth died at the age of 93. He was Diptera specialis and director of the Zirc Museum of Natural History which is part of the Hungarian Natural History Museum. He regularly collected Diptera from all parts of the Pannonian Biogeographic regions with the same method from the 1970s through the next 50 years. This is why our data is consequent, solid, and reliable (consistency of the collection method). Our coauthors used the same method.
Thank You for your efforts; we followed all your instructions.
Best Regards,
Zsolt, Attila, Peter and Ladislav
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis study is very interesting. It provides valuable insights into the long-term trends of pollinator populations in the Carpathian Basin and makes significant contributions to the field of conservation biology. It can serve as an important resource for policymakers and conservationists to develop strategies to mitigate the decline of pollinators and protect ecosystem services. However,it need few revisions before publication, and my suggestions are as follows:
1. Please comparison your results with other regions: While the study provides excellent regional focus, integrating comparisons with similar studies in other geographic areas could enhance the understanding of pollinator population trends and their potential global or regional drivers.
2. The figures and tables do not quite conform to the academic style. For example, Table 1 seems to have been copied directly from statistical software and needs to be edited in Word. Table 2 has too many horizontal lines, and Figure 1 lacks titles for the horizontal and vertical axes.
3. Please add a map showing the locations of the sampling sites.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your advice and instructions. Thank you for your time and energy to make our paper better. We are grateful for your comments and suggestions.
In the following, we will discuss point-by-point how we corrected our manuscript following your advice.
1.”Please comparison your results with other regions: While the study provides excellent regional focus, integrating comparisons with similar studies in other geographic areas could enhance the understanding of pollinator population trends and their potential global or regional drivers.”
We added seven important pieces of new literature, processed them, and compared their results to ours. These references include the following:
Sánchez‐Bayo, F.; Wyckhuys, K. A. G. Further evidence for a global decline of the entomofauna. Aust. Ent. 2021, 60, 9–26.
Powney, G. D.; Carvell, C.; Edwards, M.; Morris, R.K. A.; Roy, H.E.; Woodcock, B.A.; Isaac, N. J. B. Widespread losses of pollinating insects in Britain. Nature Communications. 2019, 10, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08974-9
Bartomeus , I.; Ascher, J. S.; Gibbs, J.; Danforth, B. N.; Wagner, D. L.; Hedtke, S. M.; Winfree, R. Historical changes in northeastern US bee pollinators related to shared ecological traits. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110(12) 4656-60. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1218503110.
Dar, A. A.; Jamal, K. The decline of moths globally: A review of possible causes. Mun. Ent. Zool. 2021,16(1), 317-326.
Habel, J. Ch., Schmitt, Th., Gros , P.; Ulrich, W. Breakpoints in butterfly decline in Central Europe over the last century. Sci. Tot. Env. 2022, 851, 158315 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158315
Martin S. Warrena, M. S.; Maesb, D.; van Swaayc, Ch. A. M.; Goffartd, Ph.; Van Dycke, H.; Bournf, N. A. D.; Wynhoffc, I.; Hoaref, D.; Ellisf, S. The decline of butterflies in Europe: Problems, significance, and possible solutions. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. – PNAS, 2021, 118 (2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002551117
Szentkirályi, F.; Leskó, K.; Kádár, F. Climatic effects on long‐term fluctuations in species richness and abundance level of forest macrolepidopteran assesmblages in a Hungarian mountainous region. Carpth. J. of Earth and Env. Sci. 2007, 2, 73–82.
2. "The figures and tables do not quite conform to the academic style. For example, Table 1 seems to have been copied directly from statistical software and needs to be edited in Word. Table 2 has too many horizontal lines, and Figure 1 lacks titles for the horizontal and vertical axes.”
All tables are redesigned, and the missing titles of axes are completed.
3. "Please add a map showing the locations of the sampling sites."
We completed the manuscript with a figure marking the place of captures of lepidoptera with map showing 27 sites. (Hymenoptera and Diptera was impossible since there are approx 1 200 sampling sites in the last 50 years, from all over the region.
Last Saturday, our coauthor, Dr. Sándor Tóth died at the age of 93. He was Diptera specialis and director of the Zirc Museum of Natural History which is part of the Hungarian Natural History Museum. He regularly collected Diptera from all parts of the Pannonian Biogeographic regions with the same method from the 1970s through the next 50 years. This is why our data is consequent, solid, and reliable (consistency of the collection method). Our coauthors used the same method.
Thank You for your efforts; we followed all your instructions.
Best Regards,
Zsolt, Attila, Peter and Ladislav
