Main Components of Fish Immunity: An Overview of the Fish Immune System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

The authors have considerably improved the manuscript.

Some minor issues still exist:

Line 133: Please delete primarily

Line 149: Please replace “functions a prime role” with “has a prime role”

Line 159: Please replace “for getting” with “to become”

Line 167: Please replace “involve” with “include”

Line 174-175 and 198-200 basically repeat each other. Is it possible to avoid repetition?

Line 222: I suggest to replace “destructing” with “destruction”

Line 228-233: Is there a difference between Macrophages (line 228) and circulating monocites and tissue macrophages (line 233). If not, then I suggest to avoid repetition.

Line 232: Can authors clarify what is VAChT for the reader

Line 274: Please correct “antigens presenting cells” to “antigen presenting cells”

Line 294-294 and line 298-299 is repetition that is not necessary to mention twice.

Line 469: What do the authors mean by “immediate location under the IgM gene”?         

Author Response

Dear Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your efforts in reviewing and for your valuable comments and considerable recommendations of the manuscript entiteled: 'Main components of fish immunity: An overview of the fish immune system'.

All the required corrections were addressed and were highlighted in the text in red. The reviewers' comments were answered point-by-point.

On behalf of your coauthors,

Michał Kuciel

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

The manuscript has been lightly imporved. Anyway, I recommend to remove the figures. There is no antibody validation and methodological description of the immunostaining. They are not needed for the review.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your efforts in reviewing and for your valuable comments and considerable recommendations of the manuscript entiteled: 'Main components of fish immunity: An overview of the fish immune system'.

All the required corrections were addressed and were highlighted in the text in red. The reviewers' comments were answered point-by-point.

On behalf of your coauthors,

Michał Kuciel

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This review is a very general overview of the teleost fish immune system. This is quite straightforward and classical review. Because of its general view it would benefit from more actual findings and data. Since it is presented for the Special Issue: Neuroimmune Communication in Fishes the last part dedicated to it could be more exhaustive and better described.

Comments:

- Revise it carefully for typos and strange sentences. All abbreviations have to be defined the first time.

- Are the images from previous studies or brand new? In any case, the reference or a short description should be included in the legend.

-           

Reviewer 2 Report

This review manuscript aims to provide the latest information on cellular defense mechanism of fish and provides an overview of the function of the mucosal immune system in maintaining the general health of fish.

The manuscript is well written, however several major and minor issues exist.

General issues:

I suggest the authors to proofread the manuscript in order to correct many small grammatical mistakes and improve the readability of the text. I have highlighted only few of the language-related issues.

It’s also not fully understood what arms of the immune system the authors wish to concentrate on in this review. I find the manuscript structure and paragraphs not fully appropriate. I suggest the authors to be more structured and describe innate and adaptive immune responses and their sub-components separately under designated paragraphs. Currently only a paragraph for the innate immune system exists and the components of the adaptive immune response are described scattered in different places of the manuscript.

There is also unnecessary repetition where authors, in the same text segment, repeat themselves using a slightly different formulation. I find it unnecessary, especially because it is common knowledge.

Some text segment and sentences seem out of the context. For example, line 273-275 should be removed, preferably to the paragraph 3.   

The authors concentrate mainly on the very general aspects of immunology, without deepening into the area of fish immunology. I had hoped to read more about the current and latest knowledge found in the field of fish immunology. I suggest the authors to include some of the latest studies conducted in the field. Regarding the large diversity among the teleost fish, it would be appropriate to mention the fish species when referring to a specific studies.

Examples of minor issues:

Fish or fishes in plural? Currently both forms are used in the text.

Line 42: Please delete ”live” from “…during their survival live in the environment…”.

Line 42-46: The sentence “Non specific immunity is the essential defense mechanism; however, acquired immunity also plays a fundamental role in preserving homeostasis via activation though a receptors proteins system that recognizes pathogen-accompanied molecular pattern typical of pathogenic microorganism” needs to be rephrased. It’s the innate immunity that acts by identifying pathogen associated molecular patterns. The acquired immunity acts through antigen-specific receptors.

Line 60-61: I suggest the authors to rephrase the sentence because they also address the adaptive immune system in this review and not only the innate immune system.

Line 76: Please correct T-cells clones to T-cell clones.  

Line 100: Replace “soluble substances array” with “array of soluble substances”  

Line 133 Replace “is existed” with “exists”

Line 163: I suggest the authors to list all the cells that are described in the sub-chapters below.

Line 275-278: The reference to the zebrafish study is missing.

Line 360: Do the authors mean to write: “Salmonids and cyprinids are among many species that frequently possess EGCs.”?