The authors regret that an incorrect grant number for B. Y. Chen was given in the original manuscript. The correct acknowledgements section is as shown below.The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Taiwan, under Grant No. MOST 104-2221-E-197-004-MY3 (S. H. Chang), 105-2221-E-002-047-MY3 (J. Z. Chen) and 106-2221-E-197-020-MY3 (B. Y. Chen).The Royal Society of Chemistry apologises for these errors and any consequent inconvenience to authors and readers.


Acrodictys isolates were collected from Hainan, China. Morphology from the cultures and phylogeny based on partial small subunit (SSU), entire internal transcribed spacer regions with intervening 5.8S (ITS), partial large subunit (LSU) of rRNA gene, partial beta-tubulin (tub2), and partial RNA polymerase II second largest subunit (rpb2) genes were employed to identify these isolates. As a result, four new species, namely Acrodictys bawanglingensis sp. nov., A. diaoluoshanensis sp. nov., A. ellisii sp. nov., and A. pigmentosa sp. nov., are introduced. Illustrations and descriptions of the four taxa are provided, along with comparisons with closely related taxa in the genus. For facilitating relative studies, an updated key to all accepted species of this genus is also compiled.During our ongoing survey of dematiaceous hyphomycetes associated with dead branches in tropical forests, eight  Acrodictys M.B. Ellis was erected by Ellis and typified by A. bambusicola M.B. Ellis [Acrodictys has been followed for nearly 40 years until recent segregations starting at the beginning of this century [B. Ellis . In the  century ,3,4.Acrodictyella W.A. Baker and Partr., typified by A. obovata W.A. Baker and Partr., was considered the first genus to accommodate those species similar to Acrodictys but characterized by producing hyaline, muriform conidia, which secede well before maturation and become pigmented sometime after their release [Acrodictys sensu lato into four genera, viz. Acrodictys sensu stricto, Junewangia W.A. Baker and Morgan-Jones, Pseudoacrodictys W.A. Baker and Morgan-Jones and Rhexoacrodictys W.A. Baker and Morgan-Jones. The Acrodictys sensu stricto is mainly characterized by macronematous, mononematous, cylindrical, unbranched or infrequently branched, percurrently proliferating conidiophores, and muriform conidia [Acrodictys sensu stricto, Acrodictyaceae J.W. Xia and X.G. Zhang was introduced [ release . Based o release ,5 and Ba release  divided  conidia ,7. BasedAcrodictys sensu stricto are saprobic on dead branches. They are thought to be wood-decaying fungi, promoting the carbon cycle in the ecosystem by converting cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin into inorganic substances [https://www.gbif.org, accessed on 25 June 2022). Hainan Province  is an island in southern China. Its annual mean temperature is 22–27 °C, and its annual precipitation is 1000–2600 mm. It is a typical tropical rainforest climate, suitable for the growth and reproduction of wood-decaying fungi.Species in bstances . AlthougA. bambusicola, A. elaeidicola, A. fluminicola, A. globulosa, A. hainanensis, A. liputii, A. malabarica, A. peruamazonensis, and A. porosiseptata) have been documented from tropical areas in Hainan and Yunnan Provinces [Lauraceae and Fagaceae trees, and the fungi in pure culture were isolated from these dead branches. Fungi from these axenic cultures were identified based on classic morphological and modern molecular approaches. As a result, four new species are described and illustrated herein in the genus Acrodistys sensu stricto.In China, 12 isolates representing 9 species  to locate sporulating structures. Isolations were made with single spore methods according to the following steps: Spores were suspended with sterilized water and spread onto PDA  plate and incubated for one day under a biochemical incubator. After germination, colonies were transferred to a new PDA plate to obtain a pure culture. After 30 days of incubation, morphological characters were recorded. Photographs of the colonies were taken on the 30th day using a digital camera . The micromorphological characteristics of colonies were observed using two stereomicroscopes , both fitted with a digital camera . Sporulating structures were mounted in water for microscopic observation and photomicrography. At least 50 mature conidia and conidiophores were measured using the cellSens software , and images were used for further processing with Photoshop ver. CS5 . The cultures were stored in 10% sterilized glycerin and sterile water at 4 °C for further studies. Specimens were deposited in the Herbarium Mycologicum Academiae Sinicae, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China (HMAS), and the Herbarium of the Department of Plant Pathology, Shandong Agricultural University (HSAUP). Living cultures were deposited in the Shandong Agricultural University Culture Collection (SAUCC). New taxa were submitted to the taxonomic database MycoBank  and obtained relative deposition numbers.Samples were collected from the Bawangling National Nature Reserve and Diaoluoshan National Nature Reserve, Hainan Province, China , and taken to the laboratory in plastic bags. The samples were placed in Petri dishes with moist filter paper and cultured in an incubator at 25 °C for 1–2 weeks. The samples were examined using a stereomicroscope  protocol as described in Guo et al. . Five lohttps://www.eppendorf.com/CN-zh/, accessed on 25 June 2022). Amplifications were performed in a 25 μL reaction volume, which contained 12.5 μL 2 × Taq Plus Master Mix II , 1 μL of each forward and reverse primer (10 μM) , 1 μL template genomic DNA (approximately 1 ng/μL), and 10 μL distilled deionized water. PCR products were visualized through 1% agarose gel electrophoresis. Sequencing was bidirectionally conducted by a company , and a consensus was obtained using MEGA 7.0 [PCR was performed using a thermocycler  [https://www.phylo.org, accessed on 25 June 2022) using RaxML-HPC2 on XSEDE 8.2.12  [http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree, accessed on 25 June 2022) and edited with Adobe Illustrator CS6.0 .Novel sequences were generated from the eight strains in this study, and all available reference sequences of  GenBank ,10. No rne 2022) , with dene 2022)  and thenGermany) ,14 and MGermany) ,16,17. MAcrodictys were isolated from the dead branches of unidentified trees in Hainan Province, China. The alignment of ITS, LSU, and SSU sequences was composed of 21 strains (including the 8 new strains) of Acrodictys and Fluminicola saprophytica (MFLUCC 15-0976) as the outgroup taxon, and 2419 characters, viz. 1–592 (ITS), 593–1419 (LSU), and 1420–2419 (SSU). Of these characters, 2089 were constant, 94 were variable and parsimony uninformative, and 236 were parsimony informative.Eight strains of The Bayesian analysis lasted for 65,000 generations, resulting in 1301 total trees, of which 976 trees were used to calculate the posterior probabilities. The ML tree topology is consistent with that from the BI analyses, and therefore, the ML tree is presented with BI posterior probabilities being plotted together .Acrodictys bawanglingensis (A. diaoluoshanensis (A. ellisii (A. pigmentosa (A. bambusicola (MLBS = 96% and BYPP = 1.0).The 22 strains are assigned to 15 species clades based on the three-locus phylogeny . The invingensis , A. diaohanensis , A. elli ellisii , and A. gmentosa , formingMycoBank No. 844582bawanglingensis is named after the Bawangling National Nature Reserve where the holotype was collected.Etymology―The epithet Lauraceae and Fagaceae trees, 19 May 2021, R.Y. Liu, holotype HMAS 352233, ex-holotype living culture SAUCC 1342.Type―China, Hainan Province: the Bawangling National Nature Reserve , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Description―Asexual morph on PDA: Mycelia are white to pale brown, floccose cottony, reverse black. Conidiophores are macronematous, mononematous, erect, unbranched, straight or flexuous, thick-walled, smooth, dark brown at the base, paler toward the apex, septate, 60.0–120.0 × 4.5–6.5 μm. Conidiogenous cells are monoblastic, integrated, terminal, determinate, cylindrical, pale brown to brown, and smooth. Conidia are solitary, muriform, obovoid to obpyriform, pale brown to brown, 18.0–26.0 × 10.0–16.0 μm, usually with 3 transverse septa and 1–3 longitudinal septa, slightly constricted at the septa, with conspicuous pores in the septa, and truncate at the base. Chlamydospores were not observed. Sexual morphs are unknown.Culture characteristics―Colonies on PDA are flat with an entire margin, attaining 25.0–30.0 mm in diameter after 14 days at 25 °C, with a growth rate of 1.5–2.5 mm/day, a greenish-brown color, and with a layer of white aerial hyphae on the surface. Colonies on MEA are flat with an entire margin, have a generally mouse-gray color, and are covered with a layer of white-to-gray, dense, aerial mycelia that are floccose cottony; the reverse is black with a pale brown margin.Lauraceae and Fagaceae trees, 19 May 2021, R.Y. Liu, paratype HMAS 352234, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC 1343.Additional specimen examined―China, Hainan Province: the Bawangling National Nature Reserve , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Acrodictys bawanglingensis.Notes―Strains SAUCC 1342 and SAUCC 1343 have similar morphological features and identical DNA sequences and form a monophyletic group with a long branch and robust support values , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Description―Asexual morph on PDA: Conidiophores are macronematous, mononematous, erect, unbranched, straight or flexuous, thick-walled, smooth, pale brown, septate, and 34.0–65.0 × 1.8–5.6 μm. Conidiogenous cells are monoblastic, integrated, terminal, determinate, cylindrical, pale brown, and smooth. Conidia are solitary, muriform, obovoid to obpyriform, pale brown to brown, and 18.0–22.0 × 10.0–13.0 μm, usually with 3 transverse septa and 1–2 longitudinal septa; they are slightly constricted at the septa, with conspicuous pores in the septa, and truncate at the base.Culture characteristics―Colonies on PDA are flat with an entire margin, attaining 26.0–30.0 mm in diameter after 14 days at 25 °C, with a growth rate of 1.8–2.2 mm/day; they have aerial mycelia that are white to pale brown and floccose cottony; the reverse is black. Colonies on MEA are flat with an entire margin, with white-to-gray aerial mycelia that are floccose cottony; the reverse is black with a pale brown margin.Lauraceae and Fagaceae trees, 21 May 2021, R.Y. Liu, paratype HMAS 352236, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC 1602.Additional specimen examined―China, Hainan Province: the Diaoluoshan National Nature Reserve , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Acrodictys diaoluoshanensis. In the phylogenetical tree, based on a combined dataset of three genetic markers, A. diaoluoshanensis is closely related to A. bambusicola , but they are different in conidia (A. diaoluoshanensis 18.0–22.0 × 10–13 μm vs. A. bambusicola 17.0–36.0 × 12.0–18.0 μm).Notes―Strains SAUCC 1601 and SAUCC 1602 have similar morphological features and identical DNA sequences and gather together with robust support values , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Description―Asexual morph on PDA: Conidiophores are macronematous, mononematous, erect, unbranched, straight or flexuous, thick-walled, smooth, pale brown, septate, and 47.0–82.0 × 2.1–5.2 μm. Conidiogenous cells are monoblastic, integrated, terminal, determinate, cylindrical, pale brown, and smooth. Conidia are solitary, muriform, obovoid to obpyriform, pale brown to brown, and 17.0–22.0 × 11.0–14.0 μm, usually with 3 transverse septa and 1–3 longitudinal septa; they are slightly constricted at the septa and truncate at the base.Culture characteristics―Colonies on PDA are flat with an entire margin, attaining 25.0–30.0 mm in diameter after 14 days at 25 °C, with a growth rate of 1.8–2.1 mm/day; they have aerial mycelia that are white to pale brown and floccose cottony; the reverse is black. Colonies on MEA are flat with an entire margin, with white-to-gray aerial mycelia that are floccose cottony; the reverse is black with a pale brown margin.Lauraceae and Fagaceae trees, 19 May 2021, R.Y. Liu, paratype HMAS 352238, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC 1472.Additional specimen examined―China, Hainan Province: the Bawangling National Nature Reserve , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Acrodictys ellisii. Phylogenetically, A. ellisii is closely related to A. bawanglingensis , having only 4 and 18 bp of dissimilarity in LSU and SSU, respectively. Morphologically, Acrodictys bawanglingensis also differs from A. ellisii in conidial size (60.0–120.0 × 4.5–6.5 μm vs. 47.0–82.0 × 2.1–5.2 μm).Notes―Strains SAUCC 1471 and SAUCC 1472 are similar in morphological features and identical DNA sequences and form a clade , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Description―Asexual morph on PDA: Conidiophores are macronematous, mononematous, erect, unbranched, straight or flexuous, thick-walled, smooth, pale brown, septate, and 4.5–75.0 × 1.5–3.0 μm. Conidiogenous cells are monoblastic, integrated, terminal, determinate, cylindrical, pale brown, and smooth. Conidia are solitary, muriform, obovoid to obpyriform, pale brown to brown, 12.0–24.0 × 7.0–12.0 μm, usually with 1–4 transverse septa and 1–3 longitudinal septa, slightly constricted at the septa, and truncate at the base.Culture characteristics―Colonies on PDA are flat with an entire margin, attaining 27.0–32.0 mm in diameter after 14 days at 25 °C, with a growth rate of 1.5–2.5 mm/day; they have white-to-pale-brown aerial mycelia that are floccose cottony; the reverse is black. Colonies on MEA are flat with an entire margin, with white-to-gray aerial mycelia that are floccose cottony; the reverse is black with a pale brown margin.Lauraceae and Fagaceae trees, 19 May 2021, R.Y. Liu, paratype HMAS 352240, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC 1592.Additional specimen examined―China, Hainan Province: the Bawangling National Nature Reserve , on the dead branches of unidentified trees collected in tropical rain forests dominated by Acrodictys pigmentosa. Phylogenetic analyses on a combined dataset of three genetic markers showed that A. pigmentosa is basal to the clade of A. ellisii, A. bawanglingensis, A. bambusicola, and A. diaoluoshanensis , but they are different in conidia (12.0–24.0 × 7.0–12.0 μm vs. 17.0–22.0 × 11.0–14.0 μm vs. 18.0–26.0 × 10.0–16.0 μm vs. 17.0–36.0 × 12.0–18.0μm vs. 18.0–22.0 × 10.0–13.0 μm).Notes―Strains SAUCC 1591 and SAUCC 1592 are similar in morphological features and identical DNA sequences and form a monophyletic group with robust support values (MLBV = 100%, BIPP = 1.00, Acrodictys. In order to facilitate identification in the future, a key to the species of Acrodictys is provided herein, updating the key compiled 11 years ago [1. Sexual morph known------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21’ Sexual morph unknown---------------------------------------------------------------------------------62. Maximum number of septa of ascospores > 3------------------------------------------------------32’ Maximum number of septa of ascospores ≤ 3------------------------------------------------------4A. satwalekeri3. Conidia obovate---------------------------------------------------------------------------A. elaeidicola3’ Conidia pyriform---------------------------------------------------------------------------A. nigra4. Conidia ellipsoid---------------------------------------------------------------------------------4’ Conidia muriform-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5A. peruamazonensis5. Conidia size 23.0–34.0 × 18.0–22.0 μm----------------------------------------A. hainanensis5’ Conidia size 15.0–22.0 × 7.0–13.0 μm------------------------------------------------6. Conidia with transverse septa only-------------------------------------------------------------------76’ Conidia with transverse and longitudinal septa-------------------------------------------------147. Conidia clavate--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------87’ Conidia rounded-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10A. similis8. Conidiogenous cells in groups--------------------------------------------------------------8’ Conidiogenous cells singly-----------------------------------------------------------------------------9A. aquatica9. Conidiogenous cells size 70.0–100.0 × 4.0–6.0 μm------------------------------------A. fluminicola9’ Conidiogenous cells size 98.0–142.0 × 4.0–6.0 μm---------------------------------A. caribensis10. Conidiogenous cells branched---------------------------------------------------------10’ Conidiogenous cells unbranched------------------------------------------------------------------1111. Conidiogenous cells septate-------------------------------------------------------------------------1211’ Conidiogenous cells aseptate-----------------------------------------------------------------------13A. brooksiae12. Conidia spheroid---------------------------------------------------------------------------A. sacchari12’ Conidia ellipsoidal--------------------------------------------------------------------------A. elliptica13. Conidia 2–3 transverse septa--------------------------------------------------------------A. liputii13’ Conidia 4–9 transverse septa----------------------------------------------------------------A. furcata14. Conidiophores in groups-------------------------------------------------------------------14’ Conidiophores singly---------------------------------------------------------------------------------15-A. septosporioides15. Conidia maximum length > 100 μm-------------------------------------------15’ Conidia maximum length < 100 μm---------------------------------------------------------------1616. Conidiogenous cells lageniform--------------------------------------------------------------------1716’ Conidiogenous cells cylindrical--------------------------------------------------------------------22A. balladynae17. Conidiogenous cells determinate proliferations----------------------------------17’ Conidiogenous cells percurrent proliferations-------------------------------------------------1818. Conidia subglobose or ellipsoidal-----------------------------------------------------------------1918’ Conidia clavate or pyriform-------------------------------------------------------------------------20-A. irregularis19. Conidia size 12.0–22.0 × 8.0–16.0 μm-----------------------------------------------A. oblonga19’ Conidia size 27.0–32.0 × 12.0–16.0 μm--------------------------------------------------A. porosiseptata20. Conidiogenous cells maximum length > 200 μm ------------------------------20’ Conidiogenous cells maximum length < 200 μm ----------------------------------------------21A. bambusicola21. Conidia size 20.0–30.0 × 13.0–16.0 μm---------------------------------------------A. atroapicula21’ Conidia size 17.0–27.0 × 11.0–15.0 μm----------------------------------------------22. Conidiogenous cells with percurrent proliferations-------------------------------------------2322’ Conidiogenous cells with determinate proliferations-----------------------------------------25A. micheliae23. Conidiogenous cells maximum length > 60 μm------------------------------------23’ Conidiogenous cells maximum length < 60 μm------------------------------------------------24A. lignicola24. Conidia size 28.0–32.0 × 8.0–12.0 μm---------------------------------------------------A. papillata24’ Conidia size 16.0–20.0 × 12.0–15.0 μm-------------------------------------------------25. Conidiogenous cells maximum length > 80 μm------------------------------------------------2625’ Conidiogenous cells maximum length < 80 μm------------------------------------------------27 respectively----------------------------------------------------------------------------A. bawanglingensis26. Conidia size 18.0–26.0 × 10.0–16.0 μm, exceeding 23 and 13 um in length and width,A. ellisii26’ Conidia size 18.0–22.0 × 10.0–13.0 μm----------------------------------------------------A. diaoluoshanensis27. Conidia size 18.0–22.0 × 10.0–13.0 μm------------------------------------A. pigmentosa27’ Conidia size 12.0–24.0 × 7.0–12.0 μm----------------------------------------------Together with the four new species proposed in this study, we currently accepted a worldwide total of 27 species in the genus ears ago . Since tAcrodictys sensu lato species have been characterized and identified based on conidial schizolytic/rhexolytic secession, conidiophores, conidiogenous cells, and conidia [Acrodictys as a single genus in Acrodictyaceae was introduced by Xia et al. [Acrodictys species have been characterized and identified based on dictyoseptate pigmented conidia seceding schizolytically from monoblastic integrated terminal determinate or lageniform to doliiform percurrently extending conidiogenous cells [Acrodictys species, including a new species based on morphology and ITS, LSU, SSU, and tub2 sequence data. This makes it possible for us to study Acrodictys species through molecular systematics. Subsequently, Luo et al. [Acrodictys species have molecular data, viz. A. aquatica, A. bambusicola, A. elaeidicola, A. fluminicola, A. globulosa, A. hainanensis, A. liputii, A. malabarica, A. peruamazonensis, and A. porosiseptata [Traditionally,  conidia ,3,4,5. Aa et al.  based onus cells ,6. Xia eus cells  describeo et al.  introduciseptata ,10.Tropical forest ecosystems offer suitable habitats for microfungi, among which the anamorphic species are the most abundant and diverse. Many anamorphic species have been recorded in rainforests, forest parks, and national nature reserves of Hainan Province, China ,24,25,26Acrodictys species, namely A. bawanglingensis, A. diaoluoshanensis, A. ellisii, and A. pigmentosa. The morphological descriptions and molecular data of Acrodictys in this study not only enrich the world’s fungal resources and diversity but also contribute materials for studies of the effects of saprobic hyphomycetes on carbon cycling in ecosystems.Hainan Province has a typical tropical rainforest climate, which is very suitable for the growth and reproduction of saprotrophic fungi. In this study, we chose the Bawangling National Nature Reserve and Diaoluoshan National Nature Reserve as representative sites for sample collection. Through morphological observations and molecular date analyses, we identified four new


Scientific Reports 10.1038/s41598-022-26277-w, published online 01 February 2023Correction to: The original version of this Article contained an error in the order of the author names, which was incorrectly given as Feng Li, Tong-Yue Du, Li-Da Wu, Lei Zhang, Huan-Huan Liu, Zhen-Ye Zhang, Jie Zhang, Zhi-Yuan Zhang, Ling-Ling Qian, Jian-Feng Hao & Ru-Xing Wang.The original Article has been corrected.


Correction: J Foot Ankle Res 15, 79 (2022)https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-022-00584-xAff1 "3-11-1-50, Tsukisamu Higashi, Toyohira-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 062-0053, Japan"Aff2 "S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan"Following publication of the original article , author The correction does not have any effect on the results or conclusions of the paper. The original article has been corrected.


Gnomoniopsis  has been reported all around the world and isolated from multiple plant hosts. Based on multilocus phylogenies from a combined dataset of internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region, the ribosomal RNA gene cluster, and partial regions of translation elongation factor 1 alpha (tef1) and partial beta-tubulin (tub2), in conjunction with morphological characteristics, we describe and illustrate herein four new species, including Gnomoniopsisdiaoluoshanensis sp. Nov., G. lithocarpi sp. Nov., G. mengyinensis sp. Nov. and G.yunnanensis sp. Nov. Alongside this, their similarity and dissimilarity to morphologically-allied and phylogenetically-related species are annotated and discussed. For facilitating future identification, we update the key to all species currently recognized in this genus.The fungal genus  Diaporthales Nannf. is an important order in the perithecial ascomycetes Sordariomycetes Erikss. & Winka, accommodating not only saprophytes but also endophytes or phytopathogens on various hosts [Gnomoniaceae Winter, which contains 60 genera and 919 species, the second largest family in this order, occurs on growing and overwintering leaves and twigs of hardwood trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants [Gnomoniaceae was circumscribed by Sogonov et al. in 2008 [Gnomoniaceae is often associated with a single host genus or species [us hosts ,2,3,4,5.s plants . This fas plants  and conss plants . Gnomoni in 2008 , and sin species ,15,16,17Gnomoniopsis Berl. was initially described as a subgenus within Gnomonia Ces. & De Not. for species with multi-septate ascospores [Gnomoniopsis was synonymized with Gnomonia [Gnomoniopsis is accepted as a separate genus in the Gnomoniaceae and typified by Gnomoniopsis chamaemori (Fr.) Berl. This genus is characterized by having small, black perithecia immersed in the host tissue and one-septate, oval to fusiform ascospores [Fagaceae, Onagraceae and Rosaceae [Gnomoniopsis in the Index Fungorum (accessed on 20 June 2022) and 26 species possess sequence data.cospores . SubsequGnomonia . Currentcospores . SpeciesRosaceae ,11,15,18Castanea mollissima Bl. (Fagaceae), Castanopsis chinensis Hance (Fagaceae), and Lithocarpus fohaiensis (Hu) A. Camus (Fagaceae). We obtained their respective morphological characteristics by separation and purification, using sequences of three molecular markers, including the internal transcribed spacer of ribosomal RNA gene (ITS rDNA), the translation elongation factor 1 alpha gene (tef1), and the beta-tubulin gene (tub2); we identified these fungi as four species of the genus Gnomoniopsis, and proposed them herein.Fungi associated with leaf spots were collected from Castanea mollissima, Castanopsis chinensis and Lithocarpus fohaiensis showing necrotic spots were collected from Hainan, Shandong and Yunnan Provinces in China during 2020 and 2021. We obtained a single strain using tissue isolation and single spore isolation. Fragments (5 × 5 mm) were taken from the edges of leaf lesions, surface-sterilized by immersing consecutively in 75% ethanol solution for 1 min and rinsed in sterile distilled water for 30 s, and in 5% sodium hypochlorite solution for 30 s, and then rinsed three times in sterile distilled water for 30 s. The sterilized pieces were placed on sterile filter paper to absorb moisture and then placed on the PDA  and incubated at 25 °C for 2–4 days. Subsequently, portions of agar with fungal mycelia from the periphery of the colonies were transferred onto new PDA plates and photographed on the 7th and 15th days by a digital camera (Canon Powershot G7X).Samples of https://www.digimizer.com/, accessed on 20 June 2022), with 30 measurements taken for each character [http://www.mycobank.org, accessed on 20 June 2022).Micromorphological characters from structures produced in culture were observed using an Olympus SZX10 stereomicroscope and Olympus BX53 microscope, all fitted with an Olympus DP80 high-definition color digital camera to photo-document fungal structures. All fungal strains were stored in 10% sterilized glycerin at 4 ℃ for further studies. Structural measurements were taken using the Digimizer software (haracter . Vouchertef1) and partial beta-tubulin gene (tub2), were amplified with the primer pairs and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) programs listed in Genomic DNA was extracted from mycelia grown on PDA using a CTAB (cetyltrimethylammonium bromide) method ,21. Thretef1-tub2 analysis, subsets of sequences from the alignments of Jiang et al. [http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/, accessed on 20 June 2022) [tef1-tub2)  . To estaf1-tub2) .https://www.phylo.org/, accessed on 20 June 2022) [http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree, accessed on 20 June 2022) and the layout of the trees was carried out in Adobe Illustrator CC 2019.Phylogenetic analyses were conducted for the multi-marker data based on maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) algorithms. For BI, the best evolutionary model for each partition was determined using MrModeltest v. 2.3  and incone 2022) . ML was ne 2022)  and 1000ne 2022) ,33,34. FGnomoniopsis and allied taxa, and the strain CBS 109778 of Melanconis stilbostoma was used as the outgroup. A total of 1751 characters were used for phylogenetic analyses, viz. 1–550 (ITS), 551–1222 (tef1), 1223–1751 (tub2). Of these characters, 979 were constant, 69 were variable and parsimony-uninformative and 703 were parsimony-informative. MrModelTest recommended that the Bayesian inference should use the Dirichlet base frequencies and the GTR+I+G evolutionary mode for all the three partitions. The topology of the Bayesian tree was consistent with that of the ML tree, and therefore is shown as a representative for recapitulating evolutionary history within the genus Gnomoniopsis , 21 May 2021, Z.X. Zhang, holotype HMAS 352166, ex-holotype living culture SAUCC DL0963.Type—China, Hainan Province, Diaoluoshan National Silva Park , on diseased leaves of Description—Leaf is endogenic and associated with leaf spots. Conidiomata (pycnothyria) are buried or attached to mycelia, aggregated or solitary, erumpent, exuding creamy yellow conidia after 7 days at 25 ℃ in dark. Conidiophores are indistinct, often reduced. Conidiogenous cells are hyaline, smooth, multi-guttulate, cylindrical to ampulliform, attenuate towards apex, phialidic, 8.0–12.0 × 1.0–2.0 μm. Conidia are hyaline, smooth, multi-guttulate, ellipsoid to broadly ellipsoid, base truncate, 3.8–7.0 × 1.2–2.0 μm, mean = (5.2 ± 0.7) × (1.6 ± 0.2) μm, see Culture characteristics—Colonies on PDA entirely occupy a 90 mm petri dish in 14 days at 25 °C in dark, with a growth rate of 6.0–6.5 mm/day, are grey-white to creamy white with an irregular margin, spreading out in circles in a similar way to petals and the reverse is similar in color.Castanopsis chinensis (Fagaceae), 21 May 2021, Z.X. Zhang, paratype HMAS 352168, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC DL0961; on diseased leaves of Castanopsis chinensis (Fagaceae), 21 May 2021, Z.X. Zhang, paratype HMAS 352167, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC DL0964.Additional specimen examined—China, Hainan Province, Diaoluoshan National Silva Park, on diseased leaves of tef1 and tub2) showed that Gnomoniopsis diaoluoshanensis sp. nov. formed an independent clade and is phylogenetically closely related to G. daii, G. mengyinensis sp. nov. and G. yunnanensis sp. nov.  [Notes—Phylogenetic analyses of a combined three genes  .MycoBank—No: MB844513lithocarpi pertains to the generic name of the host plant Lithocarpus fohaiensis.Etymology—The epithet Lithocarpus fohaiensis (Fagaceae), 11 Sep 2020, Z. X. Zhang, holotype HMAS 352165, ex-holotype living culture SAUCC200743.Type—China, Yunnan Province, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden , Chinese Academy of Sciences, on diseased leaves of Description—Leaf is endogenic and associated with leaf spots. Conidiomata (pycnothyria) are buried or attached to mycelia, aggregated or solitary, erumpent, exuding pale yellow conidia after 14 days at 25 °C in dark. Conidiophores are indistinct, often reduced. Conidiogenous cells are hyaline, smooth, multi-guttulate, cylindrical to ampulliform, attenuate towards apex, phialidic, 6.0–13.0 × 1.5–2.5 μm. Conidia are hyaline, smooth, multi-guttulate, ellipsoid to ovoid, base circular, 4.0–5.8 × 1.7–2.4 μm, mean = (4.6 ± 0.5) × (2.1 ± 0.2) μm, see Culture characteristics—Colonies on PDA at 25 °C for 14 days in dark reach 75–80 mm in diameter, are circular, with moderate aerial mycelia on the surface, light brown and sparse in the center, white and dense at the edge and the reverse is similar in color.Lithocarpus fohaiensis (Fagaceae), 11 Sep 2020, Z.X. Zhang, paratype HMAS 352164, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC YN0742.Additional specimen examined—China, Yunnan Province, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences on diseased leaves of tef1 and tub2) showed that Gnomoniopsis lithocarpi formed an independent clade closely related to G. castanopsidis and G. silvicola. The G.lithocarpi sp. nov. is distinguished from G. castanopsidis by 35/513, 41/325 and 48/478 characters in ITS, tef1 and tub2 sequences, respectively, and from G. silvicola by 38/517, 42/325 and 58/470 characters. Morphologically, G.lithocarpi differs from G. castanopsidis and G. silvicola in conidia (4.0–5.8 × 1.7–2.4 μm vs. 4.5–5.3 × 2.2–2.7 μm vs. 4.6–5.1 × 2.1–2.5 μm), and in colony texture (light brown to white on PDA and dense at the edge vs. dirty-white to fawn on PDA and undulate margin vs. dirty-white on PDA and undulate margin) [Notes—Phylogenetic analyses of three combined genes , 25 July 2020, Z.X. Zhang, holotype HMAS 352160, ex-holotype living culture SAUCC MY0293.Type—China, Shandong Province, Mengyin County , on diseased leaves of Description—Leaf is endogenic and associated with leaf spots. Conidiomata (pycnothyria) are aggregated or solitary, erumpent, globose to pulvinate, light brown, exuding creamy white or hyaline conidial after 10 days at 25 °C in dark. Conidiophores are indistinct, often reduced. Conidiogenous cells are hyaline, cylindrical, attenuate towards apex, phialidic, 8.0–11.5 × 1.3–2.2 μm. Conidia are hyaline, smooth, multi-guttulate, cylindrical, oval to fusoid, straight or slightly curved, truncate at the base, 4.5–6.5 × 1.8–2.8 μm, mean = (5.4 ± 0.4) × (2.2 ± 0.2) μm, see Culture characteristics—Cultures incubated on PDA at 25 °C in dark attain 82.0–86.0 mm in diameter after 14 days, with a growth rate of 5.8–6.2 mm diam/day and the colonies are flat, spreading with moderate aerial mycelia and lobate to undulate margins, grey-white to creamy, spreading out in a similar way to petals and the reverse is similar in color.Castanea mollissima (Fagaceae), 25 July 2020, Z.X. Zhang, paratype HMAS 352159, ex-prartype living culture SAUCC MY0296.Additional specimen examined—China, Shandong Province, Mengyin County, on diseased leaves of Gnomoniopsis mengyinensis sp. nov. is closely related to G. daii . This new species is distinguished from G. daii by a total of 65 characters in the concatenated sequence alignment . Morphologically, Gnomoniopsis mengyinensis differs from G. daii in conidia (4.5–6.5 × 1.8–2.8 μm vs. 5.1–6.3 × 2.8–3.2 μm), conidiogenous cells (4.5–6.5 × 1.8–2.8 μm vs. 5.6–6.1 × 2.8–3.2 μm), as well as conidiomatum color (light brown vs. dark brown) [Notes—In the phylogenetic tree , Gnomonik brown) .MycoBank—No: MB844515yunnanensis pertains to the location where the holotype was collected, Yunnan Province.Etymology—The epithet Castanea mollissima (Fagaceae), 11 Sep 2020, Z. X. Zhang, holotype HMAS 352161, ex-holotype living culture SAUCC YN1659.Type—China, Yunnan Province, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden , Chinese Academy of Sciences, on diseased leaves of Description—Leaf is endogenic and associated with leaf spots. Conidiomata (pycnothyria) are aggregated or solitary, erumpent, globose to pulvinate, light yellow, exuding creamy white or hyaline conidia after 14 days at 25 °C in dark. Conidiophores are indistinct, often reduced. Conidiogenous cells are hyaline, cylindrical, attenuate towards apex, phialidic, 9.0–18.0 × 0.5–1.57 μm. Conidia are hyaline, smooth, multi-guttulate, cylindrical, oblong to ellipsoid, straight or slightly curved, truncate at the base, 4.1–5.5 × 1.3–2.0 μm, mean = (4.9 ± 0.4) × (1.6 ± 0.2) μm, see Culture characteristics—Cultures incubated on PDA at 25 °C for 14 days in dark attain 69.0–72.0 mm in diameter, with a growth rate of 4.9–5.2 mm diam/day, with moderate aerial mycelia and a lobate to undulate margin, grey-white to creamy, spreading out in a similar way to petals and the reverse is similar in color.Castanea mollissima (Fagaceae), 11 Sep 2020, Z.X. Zhang, paratype HMAS 352162, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC YN1657; on diseased leaves of Castanea mollissima (Fagaceae), 11 Sep 2020, Z.X. Zhang, paratype HMAS 352163, ex-paratype living culture SAUCC YN1641.Additional specimen examined—China, Yunnan Province, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, on diseased leaves of Gnomoniopsis yunnanensis sp. nov. on the basis of similar morphology and molecular monophyly. For details, one can refer to the notes for G. diaoluoshanensis.Notes—Strains SAUCC YN1659, SAUCC YN1657 and SAUCC YN1641 are identified to the same species Gnomoniopsis. In order to facilitate identification in the future, a key to the species of Gnomoniopsis is provided herein. Characteristics adopted in the key include perithecia, septa, asci, ascospores, conidiogenous cells, conidia, and chlamydospores.Together with the 4 new species proposed in this study, we have currently accepted a worldwide total of 30 species in the genus 1. Sexual morph known------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21. Sexual morph unknown-------------------------------------------------------------------------------162. Asci cylindrical--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32. Asci fusiform-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4G. chamaemori3. Ascospores size 10.0–13.0 × 2.0–3.0 μm---------------------------------------------G. smithogilvyi3. Ascospores size 4.0–12.0 × 1.0–3.0 μm----------------------------------------------4. Perithecia without stroma-------------------------------------------------------------------------------54. Perithecia with stroma-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------7G. sanguisorbae5. Perithecia immersed--------------------------------------------------------------------5. Perithecia superficies-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6G. clavulata6. Perithecia size 110.0–150.0 × 120.0–140.0 μm-----------------------------------G. paraclavulata6. Perithecia size 139.0–180.0 × 156.0–241.0 μm-----------------------------7. Ascospores aseptate--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------87. Ascospores septate--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10G. racemula8. Perithecia groups----------------------------------------------------------------------------8. Perithecia solitary-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9G. tormentillae9. Ascospores size 6.0–10.0 × 1.5–3.0 μm----------------------------------------------G. agrimoniae9. Ascospores size 7.0–8.0 × 1.8–2.2 μm-------------------------------------------------10. Perithecia surfaced on the host---------------------------------------------------------------------1110. Perithecia immersed in the host--------------------------------------------------------------------12G. alderdunensis11. Perithecia size 280.0–375.0 × 327.0–490.0 μm----------------------------------G. comari11. Perithecia size 112–330.0 × 125–500.0 μm-----------------------------------------------12. Perithecia immersed in stem------------------------------------------------------------------------1312. Perithecia immersed in leaves----------------------------------------------------------------------14G. idaeicola13. Asci size 30.0–48.5 × 5.0–10.0-------------------------------------------------------------G. macounii13. Asci size 30.0–38.0 × 4.0–8.5--------------------------------------------------------------G. guttulata14. Perithecia aggregated 2–4----------------------------------------------------------------14. Perithecia solitary--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15G. fragariae15. Perithecia size 150.0–475.0 × 200.0–475.0 μm----------------------------------------G. occulta15. Perithecia size 129.0–340.0 × 147.0–428.0 μm-------------------------------------------16. Conidiogenous cells guttulate----------------------------------------------------------------------1716. Conidiogenous cells no guttulate------------------------------------------------------------------24G. lithocarpi sp. nov.17. Conidia base circular--------------------------------------------------------17. Conidia base truncate---------------------------------------------------------------------------------1818. Conidia ellipsoid or cylindrical---------------------------------------------------------------------1918. Conidia oval or fusoid--------------------------------------------------------------------------------20G. diaoluoshanensis sp. nov.19. Conidiogenous cells size 8.0–12.0 × 1.0–2.0 μm-------------G. guangdongensis19. Conidiogenous cells size 12.5–24.0 × 1.5–3.0 μm---------------------------G. rossmaniae20. Conidia 1-septate-------------------------------------------------------------------------20. Conidia aseptate----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2121. Conidia maximum length < 6.0 μm----------------------------------------------------------------2221. Conidia maximum length > 6.0 μm----------------------------------------------------------------23G. castanopsidis22. Conidiogenous cells 6.5–13.0 × 1.5–3.0 μm--------------------------------------G. silvicola22. Conidiogenous cells 7.0–15.0 × 1.5–2.5 μm--------------------------------------------G. fagacearum23. Conidiogenous cells 16.0–33.5 × 2.0–5.0--------------------------------------------G. hainanensis23. Conidiogenous cells 16.5–26.0 × 2.5–4.5-------------------------------------------24. Conidiogenous cells one-celled---------------------------------------------------------------------2524. Conidiogenous cells multi-celled------------------------------------------------------------------26G. chinensis25. Conidia 1-septate---------------------------------------------------------------------------G. daii25. Conidia aseptate-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------G. xunwuensis26. Conidiogenous cells branched-------------------------------------------------------26. Conidiogenous cells unbranched------------------------------------------------------------------2727. Conidia maximum length < 10.0 μm--------------------------------------------------------------2827. Conidia maximum length > 10.0 μm--------------------------------------------------------------29G. mengyinensis sp. nov.28. Conidia oval to fusoid--------------------------------------------------G. yunnanensis sp. nov.28. Conidia oblong to ellipsoid---------------------------------------------G. angolensis29. Conidia subcylindrical------------------------------------------------------------------G. rosae29. Conidia fusoid-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Gnomoniopsisdiaoluoshanensis, G. lithocarpi, G. mengyinensis, and G. yunnanensis) from three hosts  in three provinces of China were described and illustrated . Sixteen Gnomoniopsis species (including the four new species herein) were described from fagaceous hosts. Only one species (G. racemula) was described from the Onagraceae family [Rosaceae. The Fagaceae, Onagraceae and Rosaceae plants are widely distributed in China, suggesting abundant potentially new Gnomoniopsis species.In the present study, four new species , translation elongation factor 1 alpha (tef1), and beta-tubulin (tub2). They described and illustrated the Gnomoniopsis species from seven regions  in China. In sum, 13 species of Gnomoniopsis were recorded in more than 10 regions of China, and they are Gnomoniopsis castanopsidis, G. chinensis, G. daii, G. diaoluoshanensis, G. fagacearum, G. guangdongensis, G. hainanensis, G. lithocarpi, G. mengyinensis, G. rossmaniae, G. silvicola, G. xunwuensis and G. yunnanensis.Driven by recent developments in DNA sequence analyses, taxonomists have combined phylogenetic data to gain insights into evolutionary relationships ,38,39. JGnomoniopsis species were reported with 200 records in Fungal Databases . Among these, G. daii and G. chinensis were determined to be phytopathogenic, causing fruit rot and leaf spot diseases and branch canker of Chinese chestnut, respectively [Gnomoniopsis smithogilvyi were illustrated and described in 12 countries  with 30 records in Fungal Databases, causing sweet chestnut branch canker and fruit rot in Australia, Europe and USA [Dothiorella iberica, Do. omnivora, Do. symphoricarposicola and G. smithogilvyi. Gnomoniopsis smithogilvyi was isolated from rotting chestnut kernels as an endophyte from asymptomatic flowers, leaves and stems of the genus Chestnut [Gnomoniopsis by taxonomists represent an important resource for plant pathologists and plant quarantine officials.The ectively ,41. Gnom and USA ,43,44. AChestnut . The des


The correct ORCID iD is: 0000-0002-3305-0034 (


Shadow removal is an important issue in the field of motion object surveillance and automatic control. Although many works are concentrated on this issue, the diverse and similar motion patterns between shadows and objects still severely affect the removal performance. Constrained by the computational efficiency in real-time monitoring, the pixel feature based methods are still the main shadow removal methods in practice. Following this idea, this paper proposes a novel and simple shadow removal method based on a differential correction calculation between the pixel values of Red, Green and Blue channels. Specifically, considering the fact that shadows are formed because of the occlusion of light by objects, all the reflected light will be attenuated. Hence there will be a similar weakening trends in all Red, Green and Blue channels of the shadow areas, but not in the object areas. These trends can be caught by differential correction calculation and distinguish the shadow areas from object areas. Based on this feature, our shadow removal method is designed. Experiment results verify that, compared with other state-of-the-art shadow removal methods, our method improves the average of object and shadow detection accuracies by at least 10% in most of the cases. With the application of intelligent video surveillance and automatic control, shadow removal becomes more and more important. An effective shadow removal method can minimize the interference of shadows on object detection, recognition and control , 2. In fTo satisfy the need for real-time computing in object surveillance, background difference based methods , 9 are sThe organizations of the remainder of this paper are structured as follows. In Related Work Section, the related works are described. In RGB Pixel Differential Correction Feature Section, the limitation of RGB-PRC method is illustrated, and a new RGBP-DC feature is proposed. Then, a new DC-SR method is designed based on the RGBP-DC feature in Differential Correction Based Shadow Removal Method Section. In Experiments Section, a lot of comparison experiments are performed to verify the effectiveness of the proposed DC-SR method. Finally, the conclusion and limitation of the proposed method are given in Conclusion Section. The main contributions of our work are summarized as follows:A new pixel feature, i.e., RGBP-DC feature, is found in the shadow areas of images.A new differential correction based shadow removal (DC-SR) method is proposed.Currently, in the field of real-time monitoring, we still need the background difference to quickly find out the areas of objects. After that, the goal of shadow removal becomes to distinguish the shadow areas from the object areas based on two kinds of methods: the model-based and feature-based methods, respectively.Model-based methods mainly use prior information to train corresponding models. For example, Zhang proposed a robust vehicle detection method with shadow elimination . Amin BeDifferent from model-based methods, feature-based methods mainly concentrate on distinguishing and removing the shadow by contour, brightness, color, texture and other features of pixel which are less affected by environmental factors. Hence, those methods have a wide range of application. For example, Xu obtained the stable shadow elimination results through HSV color features, by using the difference idea of image Log domain . Park usIn this paper, we also concentrate on distinguishing and removing the shadow by pixel features. Different from the aforementioned features, the proposed pixel feature is obtained according to both the principle of shadow formation and the statistics of a large number of actual scenes. Hence, the feature proposed in this paper is more typical and has wider applicability. All of the above will be discussed in the next sections.x, y), the pixel values of this point in R, G and B channels are denoted as R, G and B, respectively, and the ones in shadow are denoted as Rs, Gs and Bs, respectively. According to Reviewers' comments:Reviewer's Responses to Questions  Comments to the Author1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?  The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Partly**********  2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?   Reviewer #1: No**********  3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.  The Reviewer #1: No**********  4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?  PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.Reviewer #1: Yes**********  5. Review Comments to the Author  Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. Reviewer #1: ID : PONE-D-22-17507Title : A differential correction based shadow removal method for real-time monitoringSummary:In this work, a shadow removal method-based on a differential correction is proposed. The proposed method computes the differential correlation between the pixel values of the channel in RGB color space.The manuscript is interesting; however, the following comment should be addressed :Abstract :- - - - - - - - - - -1 – Results should be included at the end of the abstract in terms of improvement ratio between the proposed and existing works .Introduction Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 – The Introduction section is lengthy and need to be separated into Introduction and Related Work sections .3 – organization of the manuscript should be included at the end of the Introduction section .RGB pixel differential correction feature Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4 – Check for grammatical errors and typos.Differential correction based shadow removal method Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 – more visual example are required .The structure of DC-SR method Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 – Pseudo code of the method need to be included .7 – the implementation need be included as a supplementary file for review purposes .Experiments Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8 - Experimental computation time need to be included .9 – Discussion is unclear .10 – comparison with recent algorithm should be included .11 – Evaluation metrics should be used to evaluate the performance of the proposed method .Conclusion Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -12 – The limitation of this work should be clearly included in the conclusion section .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -**********  6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.  Reviewer #1: No**********https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool,  14 Sep 2022The response is in Attach FilesAttachmentResponse_to_Reviewer.pdfSubmitted filename: Click here for additional data file. 4 Oct 2022A differential correction based shadow removal method for real-time monitoringPONE-D-22-17507R1Dear Dr. Liu,We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at onepress@plos.org.If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact Kind regards,Zhaoqing Pan, Ph.D.Academic EditorPLOS ONEReviewers' comments:Reviewer's Responses to Questions  Comments to the Author  1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed**********  2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?  The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes**********  3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?   Reviewer #1: Yes**********  4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.  The Reviewer #1: Yes**********  5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?  PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.Reviewer #1: Yes**********  6. Review Comments to the Author  Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. Reviewer #1: ID : PONE-D-22-17507 R1Title : A differential correction based shadow removal method for real-time monitoringSummary:In this work, a shadow removal method-based on a differential correction is proposed. The proposed method computes the differential correlation between the pixel values of the channel in RGB color space.In the revised manuscript, the authors have address all the raised comments .Abstract :- - - - - - - - - - -1 – The abstract is fine. No comments .Introduction Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 – This section is fine. No comments .Related Work Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 – This section is fine. No comments .RGB pixel differential correction feature Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4 – This section is fine. No comments .Differential correction based shadow removal method Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 – This section is fine. No comments .The structure of DC-SR method Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 – This section is fine. No comments .Experiments Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -7 - This section is fine. No comments .Conclusion Section :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8 – This section is fine. No comments .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -**********  7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.  Reviewer #1: No********** 28 Oct 2022PONE-D-22-17507R1 A differential correction based shadow removal method for real-time monitoring Dear Dr. Liu:I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. onepress@plos.org.If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact plosone@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staffon behalf ofDr. Zhaoqing Pan Academic EditorPLOS ONE


LCO), alveolar volume (VA), and the transfer coefficient of the lungs for carbon monoxide  in the Japanese population. We also intended to assess the applicability of these values for the Japanese population by comparing them to those published by the Global Lung Function Initiative in 2017 (GLI-2017) and previous values.To generate appropriate reference values for the single-breath diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide  method and the generalized additive models for the location, scale, and shape program in R were used to generate the reference values.In this retrospective study, we measured the spirometric indices, DLCO were approximately zero, whereas those of KCO and VA were far from zero. In the present study, the mean square errors of the DLCO, VA, and KCO reference values were lower than the reference values derived from GLI-2017 and previous linear regression equations.We conducted a total of 390 tests. The GLI-2017 z-scores of DCO (DLCO / VA) and overestimating VA, respectively, by the GLI-2017 for the Japanese population.Reference values obtained in this study were more appropriate for our sample than those reported in GLI-2017. Differences between the two equations were attributed to underestimating K LCO) is a simple non-invasive method for diagnosing and monitoring patients with chronic lung diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or interstitial lung disease (ILD)  (DLCO), 1.000  (KCO [DLCO/VA]), and -1.617  (VA) for men and 0.586 , 2.017 , and -1.525  for women  for men, thus indicating a disagreement between our observed data and the GLI-2017 predicted values. This suggested that the GLI-2017 prediction equations were inappropriate for the Japanese population.To characterize our study population in relation to the GLI-2017, we calculated the z-scores for the Dor women . We testor women . In the LCO (TLCO) and VA in men and women, respectively. The height and age were independent predictors of each M (μ), which required a natural logarithmic transformation of the height and a spline function for age, consistent with the GLI-2017 equations. We selected the BCCG distribution over the normal and BCPE distributions to model all prediction equations.LCO was lower than our current values in women but was consistent with our values in men (CO (DLCO/VA) were lower than our current values for all age decades  was lower than our current values across all heights . Compared with previous linear DLCO reference values, our current values were within the range established by Nishida et al.  and Burrows et al.  for all age decades. In other words, the current Japanese DLCO (TLCO) values were certainly placed between the Japanese and Caucasian DLCO values (LCO/VA) reference values were higher than those of previous equations, whereas the current VA reference values were lower than GLI-2017 in both men and women , and VA than those from the GLI-2017 equation, which suggested better predictive results from our current equations to the Japanese population set.Subsequently, we compared the predictive performance between our study and previous equations in terms of MSEs . We obseLCO using the GAMLSS approach in patients with near-normal lung function and to assess the applicability of the GLI-2017 prediction equation for a Japanese patient cohort. First, the GLI-2017 prediction equation for Caucasian patients did not match the DLCO, KCO (DLCO/VA), and VA data for the contemporary Japanese patient population, thereby highlighting the importance of developing prediction equations for the Japanese population. Second, we established prediction equations for the DLCO, KCO (DLCO/VA), and VA in a Japanese population aged 16–85 years using the GAMLSS model. Third, the GAMLSS model outperformed GLI-2017 equations and previous linear regression equations for the Japanese population.This is the first study to model the DLCO (TLCO) were relatively nearer zero, particularly in men. However, the z-scores of the KCO (DLCO/VA) were significantly higher (1.51 ± 0.090) in men and women, whereas those for VA were significantly lower (-1.566 ± 0.075). Thus, the GLI-2017 prediction equation tended to underestimate the KCO (DLCO/VA) and overestimate the VA, thus resulting in a relatively accurate estimate of DLCO in the Japanese population  decreases monotonically across the entire age range of a healthy Caucasian population, with the variability remaining nearly constant between 20 and 80 years, close to the age of our study population Reviewers' comments:Reviewer's Responses to Questions  Comments to the Author1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?  The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: YesReviewer #2: YesReviewer #3: Yes**********  2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?   Reviewer #1: I Don't KnowReviewer #2: YesReviewer #3: Yes**********  3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.  The Reviewer #1: YesReviewer #2: YesReviewer #3: Yes**********  4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?  PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.Reviewer #1: YesReviewer #2: YesReviewer #3: Yes**********  5. Review Comments to the Author  Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. Reviewer #1: it is an interesting study, insofar as it could contribute to having reference equations for the Japanese and even Asian population.the result of your study indicates that using the reference equations of GLI-2017, the KCO has been overestimated and the VA has been underestimated. the main difference is therefore the overestimation of the VA. and this is mainly due to methodological imperfections such as :- This is a single center study- the sample is small- line (89-91 and line 95) : you included hypertensive and other with early stage lung cancer, sarcoidosis, or asthma and small abnormal shadows- TLCO data were not adjusted to the inspiratory oxygen partial pressure at standard barometric pressure- the altitude of the centre in which the reference values were obtained was not mentioned- you did not specify whether the reference values were obtained using a fixed dead space correction of 150 mL or not.Reviewer #2: The aim of this study was to establish appropriate reference equations of diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), alveolar volume (VA), and transfer coefficient of the lung for carbon monoxide (KCO) in Japanese population. By using the GAMLSS model on the data of pulmonary diffusion capacity tests collected from age 16-85 Japanese people, the authors proposed equations for calculating predictive values of DLCO, VA and KCO in Japanese without chronic lung disease. The authors also compared the predictive values derived from their equations with those values from other reference equations to examine the performance of their prediction equations.There are some questions and concerns need to be clarified:1.Line 84. Materials and Methods. It would be better to provide objective parameters for some of the including and excluding criteria, e.g. anemia, severe renal or liver dysfunction, etc. Besides, “not anemia” of inclusion criteria could be omitted since “anemia” had been listed as one of the exclusion criteria.2.Line 86. Materials and Methods. The authors need to clarify the meaning of inclusion criteria (6): “ …chest computed tomography (CT) performed on the day of LFTs in the second half of the previous year”. Did it mean that “chest CT performed within 6 moths before the lung function test”?3.Line 159 and Table 1. The number of women randomized for model assessment (37) was not equal to 1/5 of total recruited woman participant, as the authors mentioned in the text.4.Line 155. Results. Was there any significantly statistic finding among the data from different groups in Table 1?5.Line 161. Results. The authors need to clarify how did they determine that DLCO variation was greater in younger individuals, and DLCO and VA were height-dependent, based on the data of Table 2.6.The intents in Figure 2, 3, and 4 were too blurry to be read and interpreted. The authors need to revise these figures for readers’ convenience and reviewing.7.The authors used “DLCO (TLCO)”, “DLCO” and “TLCO” in the text to express diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (transfer factor for carbon monoxide), all of which indicated the same test. It was a little bit confused that these two terms (DLCO and TLCO) had different M equation in Table 4. Was this only for different expression of measurement unit (mmol/min/kPa vs. ml/min/mmHg), or for any other specific purpose?Reviewer #3: The authors have investigated reference values in DLCO, VA and KCO in a Japanese reference population. The manuscript is informative and the statistic procedures well documented. I would ask for these revisions:In the abstract, the following phrase is confounding, please change it if you want to: “were attributed to underestimation and overestimation of KCO (DLCO/VA) and VA, respectively, by the GLI-2017 for the Japanese population.”It might be beneficial to add something like “transfer coefficient of the lungs for carbon monoxide (KCO)”, pulmonary function testing, and so forth to the keywords.The introduction including explanation of methods was very clear and concise.In Methods, you describe that patients can withdraw their data, however, would that still be possible if data is de-identified/anonymous? Please change or delete this information.You mentioned several diseases that led to exclusion of the participant. To exclude bias, it would be highly interesting to know what kind of diseases your reference group have if they were not healthy volunteers nor have the diseases cited in the list. However, I can see the restrictions of a de-identified retrospective cohort, if this assessment is not feasible.The figures are illustrative and clear. The second figure seems fuzzy, please upload a higher-pixel version if possible.The manuscript is of interest and it is well written, highlighting the guideline-mentioned ethnic differences in lung function reference values.**********  6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.  Yes: KHADIJA AYEDReviewer #1: Reviewer #2: NoReviewer #3: Nohttps://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool,  17 Jun 2022We have revised the manuscript in accordance with reviewers’ comments in a point-by-point manner.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Reviewer #1C. the result of your study indicates that using the reference equations of GLI-2017, the KCO has been overestimated and the VA has been underestimated. the main difference is therefore the overestimation of the VA. and this is mainly due to methodological imperfections such as :1.- This is a single center study2.- the sample is small3.- line (89-91 and line 95) : you included hypertensive and other with early stage lung cancer, sarcoidosis, or asthma and small abnormal shadows4.- TLCO data were not adjusted to the inspiratory oxygen partial pressure at standard barometric pressure5.- the altitude of the centre in which the reference values were obtained was not mentioned6.- you did not specify whether the reference values were obtained using a fixed dead space correction of 150 mL or not.1.- This is a single center study2.- the sample is small3.- line (89-91 and line 95) : you included hypertensive and other with early stage lung cancer, sarcoidosis, or asthma and small abnormal shadowsResponseThank you for your insightful comment. We agree with you and have added the following sentences to the Discussion section. Pages 34-35, Lines 359－368.There is a possibility that factors such as the small sample size, single-center measurements, the altitude of our hospital, and method of determining anatomical dead space contributed to discrepancies between our predictions and those of other researchers. As mentioned in the method, to ensure a sufficient sample size, patients with early-stage lung cancer, sarcoidosis, or asthma, with small abnormal shadows that did not meet the exclusion criteria, or without abnormal shadows were included in the CT screening. The fact that lung function data of these patients were used to create and validate the predictive formula may have caused our predictive formula to differ from other predictive formulas.4.- TLCO data were not adjusted to the inspiratory oxygen partial pressure at standard barometric pressureResponse: Thank you for your observation. We agree with you and have added the following sentence to the Methods section. Page 8, Lines 112－113We used VA reported in L  to obtain DLCO.5.- the altitude of the centre in which the reference values were obtained was not mentionedResponse: Thank you for your comment. We agree with you and have added the following sentence to Page 7, Lines 108－109, Lung function tests.Our hospital is sited 621 meters above sea level.6.- you did not specify whether the reference values were obtained using a fixed dead space correction of 150 mL or not.Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We have added the following sentence to Page 8, Lines 111－112, Lung function tests.The anatomical dead space was fixed at 150 ml to obtain reference values.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Reviewer #21.Line 84. Materials and Methods. It would be better to provide objective parameters for some of the including and excluding criteria, e.g. anemia, severe renal or liver dysfunction, etc. Besides, “not anemia” of inclusion criteria could be omitted since “anemia” had been listed as one of the exclusion criteria.Response: Thank you for your good advice. We agree with you. We add the following sentences in Page 7, Line 101, Materials and Methods, Study participants.(7) severe renal or liver dysfunction. Furthermore, in Page 6, Line 86, we have excluded "not anemia" from the inclusion criteria. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2. Line 86. Materials and Methods. The authors need to clarify the meaning of inclusion criteria (6): “ …chest computed tomography (CT) performed on the day of LFTs in the second half of the previous year”. Did it mean that “chest CT performed within 6 months before the lung function test”?Response: Thank you for your observation. We have revised the inclusion criteria into the following text: (5) no abnormality or localized shadow based on chest computed tomography (CT) performed within 6 months before the lung function test. Lines 91-92----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. Line 159 and Table 1. The number of women randomized for model assessment (37) was not equal to 1/5 of total recruited woman participant, as the authors mentioned in the text.Response: Thank you for your good advice. We have revised the inclusion criteria into the following text: In order to evaluate the current study equations, we planned to randomly assign 1/5 of the patients to the model assessment group. Finally, 39 male individuals were evaluated as models . Thirty-seven female individuals were involved in model evaluation . Lines 171-175---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4. Line 155. Results. Was there any significantly statistic finding among the data from different groups in Table 1?Response: Thank you for your observation. We have added the following paragraph to highlight the statistical significance of the findings: Males involved in model assessment were older and had lower vital capacity (VC), forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) levels than those involved in model building. Females involved in model assessment were older than those involved in model building, but there was no significant difference in each index of pulmonary function test. Lines 166-170---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5. Line 161. Results. The authors need to clarify how did they determine that DLCO variation was greater in younger individuals, and DLCO and VA were height-dependent, based on the data of Table 2.Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We have revised the inclusion criteria into the following text:The 95% confidence interval for DLCO was wider in the younger age group, as shown in Table 2, indicating more variation in DLCO than in the elderly. DLCO/VA was higher in younger age groups and decreased in older age groups, whereas VA was less variable with age and increased with height. Conversely, it can be seen from Fig 2 that DLCO/VA is inversely proportional to age, while DLCO and VA are height-dependent. Line 177-183---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6. The intents in Figure 2, 3, and 4 were too blurry to be read and interpreted. The authors need to revise these figures for readers’ convenience and reviewing.Response: Thank you for your good advice. We have revised Figures 2, 3, and 4 to make them more readable.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7. The authors used “DLCO (TLCO)”, “DLCO” and “TLCO” in the text to express diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (transfer factor for carbon monoxide), all of which indicated the same test. It was a little bit confused that these two terms (DLCO and TLCO) had different M equation in Table 4. Was this only for different expression of measurement unit (mmol/min/kPa vs. ml/min/mmHg), or for any other specific purpose?Response: Thank you for your comment. As you noted, this is because the DLCO notation includes both SI units and traditional notations. When the diffusing capacity is expressed using the SI unit system, it is written as TLCO (mmol / min / kPa), whereas it is written as DLCO (ml / min / mmHg) using the traditional unit system. In Lines 107-109, we added the following paragraph: In terms of diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide notation, we have referred to the diffusivity of the traditional unit (ml / min / mmHg) as DLCO and of the SI unit system (mmol / min / kPa) as TLCO.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Reviewer 31. In the abstract, the following phrase is confounding, please change it if you want to: “were attributed to underestimation and overestimation of KCO (DLCO/VA) and VA, respectively, by the GLI-2017 for the Japanese population.”It might be beneficial to add something like “transfer coefficient of the lungs for carbon monoxide (KCO)”, pulmonary function testing, and so forth to the keywords.Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We have revised the abstract as follows : Reference values obtained in this study were more appropriate for our sample than those reported in GLI-2017. Differences between the two equations were attributed to underestimating KCO (DLCO/VA) and overestimating VA, respectively, by the GLI-2017 for the Japanese population.Lines 35-38And we added Keywords as follows: “transfer coefficient of the lungs for carbon monoxide (KCO)”, “pulmonary function test.”---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2. The introduction including explanation of methods was very clear and concise.Response: Thank you for your kind comments.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. In Methods, you describe that patients can withdraw their data, however, would that still be possible if data is de-identified/anonymous? Please change or delete this information.Response: Thank you for your good advice. We agree with you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4. You mentioned several diseases that led to exclusion of the participant. To exclude bias, it would be highly interesting to know what kind of diseases your reference group have if they were not healthy volunteers nor have the diseases cited in the list. However, I can see the restrictions of a de-identified retrospective cohort, if this assessment is not feasible.Response: Thank you for your kind comments. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5. The figures are illustrative and clear. The second figure seems fuzzy, please upload a higher-pixel version if possible.Response: Thank you for your kind comments.We have formatted the figures in our manuscript according to the requirements of the journal.AttachmentResponse_to_reviewers_revision_letter_0616doc.docSubmitted filename: Click here for additional data file. 24 Jun 2022Referential equations for pulmonary diffusing capacity using GAMLSS models derived from Japanese individuals with near-normal lung functionPONE-D-22-00545R1Dear Dr. Wada,We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at onepress@plos.org.If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact Kind regards,Aleksandra BaracAcademic EditorPLOS ONE 12 Jul 2022PONE-D-22-00545R1 Referential equations for pulmonary diffusing capacity using GAMLSS models derived from Japanese individuals with near-normal lung function Dear Dr. Wada:I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. onepress@plos.org.If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact plosone@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staffon behalf ofDr. Aleksandra Barac Academic EditorPLOS ONE