Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeReferee Comments: Referee 1
Posted by PLOS_ONE_Group on 13 Feb 2009 at 10:54 GMT
Referee 1’s Review:
* * * * * *
N.B. These are the comments made by the referee when reviewing an earlier version of this paper. Prior to publication the manuscript has been revised in light of these comments and to address other editorial requirements.
* * * * * *
This is a very interesting paper, and well written and clearly argued at that. It is the most convincing demonstration yet of number-related cognitive ability in an insect. For this generally critical reviewer, this manuscript is a clean breath of fresh air.
Minor comments:
page 2, l43, please give exact p values. Strictly speaking, p>0.05 is not sufficient to demonstrate homogeneity: the actual p might in theory just narrowly miss the 5% hurdle, in which case a power analysis might be in order.
page 3, line 30 - why not show the data? as far as I'm aware there are no length limitations in Plos1
References: the authors might also be interested in Claudia Uller's work on counting in human infants and salamanders, and there was a recent Proc Royal Soc B paper on numerical competency in songbirds.