Next Article in Journal
Structural Characteristics of the 5′-Terminal Region of Mouse p53 mRNA and Identification of Proteins That Bind to This mRNA Region
Previous Article in Journal
DOG1 as an Immunohistochemical Marker of Acinic Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Comparative Genomic Analyses of the Genus Photobacterium Illuminate Biosynthetic Gene Clusters Associated with Antagonism

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(17), 9712; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23179712
by Nyok-Sean Lau, Wooi Liang Heng, Noorizan Miswan, Nor Azura Azami and Go Furusawa *
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(17), 9712; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23179712
Submission received: 27 July 2022 / Revised: 20 August 2022 / Accepted: 24 August 2022 / Published: 26 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Molecular Genetics and Genomics)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript performed a comparative genomic analysis of the Genus Photobacterium for the detection of biosynthesis gene clusters. The authors analyzed 37 pan-genomes of the genus Photobacterium. The authors found a novel species in Photobacterium. Might be their final goals are to identify novel pathogens-antagonistic compounds for aquaculture or farming, for example, shrimp production. All genomic analysis is well performed using analyzing tool kits and finally, the novel Photobacterium species has functional BGCs (maybe holomycin-like) compound. However, there are not enough new insights for interest in the molecular science field. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this manuscript, the authors have compared the species Photobacterium sp. CCB-ST2H9 with other Photobacterium genus.

1.         Authors have not mentioned the aim of the study. How it will be helpful for others.

2.         I think in the section Abstract, line 3 the word “CCB-ST2H9” may be removed.

3.         In Figure 1 are not clearly visible, kindly make it a circular representation using NJ Method

4.         Check the English language correction throughout the manuscript.

5.         Some grammatical mistakes are there kindly correct them.

 The Manuscript is well written. My decision is minor correction

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The revised MS was well corrected in Grammatics. However, there are still not enough suitable data on BGCs products, especially holomycin, as antimicrobial substances. The present form of MS looks like a report for a bacterial new species. The author consumed many parts for general genome sequence data and identification of new species including supplementary data.

1.       Please changed to BGCs instead of biosynthetic gene clusters (BCGs) in the text all.

 

2.       The main data are antimicrobial activity through BGCs, maybe holomycin in the 3.5 section. Thus, this MS must be included in the comparison set with extract of P. galatheae for Vibrio susceptibility because P. galatheae already analyzed holomycin activity with a concentration in reference #49 or direct LC Mass data for exact holomycin functional evidence. I wonder holomycin concentration for Vibrio strains growth inhibition in extract because strain CCB-ST2H9 has many different types of BGCs in Table 2.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for your efforts. I already checked the author's revised version. They changed and corrected some sentences well. I hope the manuscript will be published in the current revision without the 3rd round.
Back to TopTop