Next Article in Journal
Comparing Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19 and Influenza-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Analysis
Next Article in Special Issue
Orthohantavirus Replication in the Context of Innate Immunity
Previous Article in Journal
Glycoprotein Non-Metastatic Melanoma Protein B Restricts PRRSV Replication by Inhibiting Autophagosome-Lysosome Fusion
Previous Article in Special Issue
Hantavirus Infection in Children—A Pilot Study of Single Regional Center
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Viruses
Volume 15
Issue 4
10.3390/v15040921
Review Report
viruses-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Opinion
Peer-Review Record

The Power of We

Viruses 2023, 15(4), 921; https://doi.org/10.3390/v15040921
by James W. Le Duc
Reviewer 1:
Robert D. Owen
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Viruses 2023, 15(4), 921; https://doi.org/10.3390/v15040921
Submission received: 21 March 2023 / Revised: 30 March 2023 / Accepted: 4 April 2023 / Published: 5 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Hantavirus Ecology, Epidemiology, and Disease, in Memory of Dr. Ho Wang Lee)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have marked a number of suggested changes (all minor) throughout the manuscript. Also I commented on some problems with the citations and references.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see attached for responses to specific questions.  The revised manuscript was attached to the earlier reply.

Please let me know if you failed to receive or have additional questions.

Please extend my thanks to the reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This was an enjoyable personal account of the research teams involved in early hantavirus discovery written by an accomplished researcher. The supportive, collaborative sentiments voiced in this perspective were welcome and inspirational. Overall, this is a positive and enjoyable perspective.

I only have a few minor comments:

1. The figures taken from previous publications are all blurry. I understand the publications are likely difficult to access and the images there may have been of lower quality than what is used today. However, as presented the figures are impossible to read.

2. On line 70, as written gives the impression that Drs. Ksaizek and Meegan invented the ELISA. Younger readers may not realize that the assay was invented independently by Drs. Engvall and Perlman over 15yrs prior. Should be rewritten.

3. Lines 113-116 could benefit from citations

Author Response

  1. I realize the poor quality of the figures and unfortunately I do not have access to the original data to reproduce them; consequently, I have deleted all figures.  Let me know if you have suggestions on how to salvage them.
  2.  Line 70 comment has been reworded to indicate that the EIA was adapted for use on the hantaviruses.
  3.  A reference for lines 113-117 has been added as requested.

MDPI review comments:  I agree that the manuscript is better referenced as a review article.

References have been modified as requested.

Please see attachment with changes as noted.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop