First Report of Lumpy Skin Disease in Myanmar and Molecular Analysis of the Field Virus Isolates

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The report describes detection and molecular identification of lumpy skin disease in field isolates in Myanmar. disease. The manuscript is well written with appropriate methods and analysis. There are a few queries which need addressed:

1. Why were only 13 samples collected from 180 clinically affected cattle? This seems a very low number and needs some explanation.
2. Line 194. The authors sya that LBVD was collected from 'some' mosquitos. A deceitption of how many were collected and how many positive is required.
3. Why were stable flies not looked at as they are also known to transmit LSVD (as authors point out on line 264.

Author Response

1. Why were only 13 samples collected from 180 clinically affected cattle? This seems a very low number and needs some explanation.

We added the following text to explain 13 samples, “From the total of 180 cattle that appeared to be infected due to their clinical signs consistent with LSD, LBVD selected 13 with typical, advanced, nodular skin lesions for sample collection. Another field sampling criterion was practicality: some affected cattle were unused to handling and maintained at premises that lacked facilities to safely restrain adult bovines. Thus, LBVD followed a purposive sample selection procedure, based on clinical appearance and operator safety.”

2. Line 194. The authors sya that LBVD was collected from 'some' mosquitos. A deceitption of how many were collected and how many positive is required; and 3. Why were stable flies not looked at as they are also known to transmit LSVD (as authors point out on line 264.

We added the following description, “LBVD collected some vectors for LSDV testing by PCR. The collected vectors comprised ten mosquitoes and four ticks from animals in Yinmarbin township. Stable flies were not available at the time of sample collection, perhaps due to smokey fires. LBVD laboratories found no PCR-positive results in either of the collected vector species.”

Reviewer 2 Report

The study presented by Maw et al. is very well performed and presented. I support publication largely in its current form but have a few suggestions as follows:

There is very little information on the existing vaccines against LSDV and its potential use. In line 88-89, the authors want to say that vaccination against LSDV has never been used in Myanmar, however, the sentence could also be understood to say that there are no vaccines. Please add a paragraph on vaccines in the introduction, and discuss feasibility in the discussion section.

Please provide more background on the 13 samples that were collected for further analysis. How were the cattle / samples selected, what were the criteria, why 13?

line 214-215: "all Myanmar LSDVs are identical" may be an overstatement since authors can only talk about the analyzed samples. I would suggest to rephrase.

line 216: "100% similar" meaning 100% identical? otherwise, please define similar.

line 64: what is the relevance that Myanmar states have predominant ethnic groups? Since this is research on cattle, the relevance is not immediately clear. The statement either needs more context or should be dropped.

Author Response

• There is very little information on the existing vaccines against LSDV and its potential use. In line 88-89, the authors want to say that vaccination against LSDV has never been used in Myanmar, however, the sentence could also be understood to say that there are no vaccines. Please add a paragraph on vaccines in the introduction, and discuss feasibility in the discussion section.

We changed the text to read “No further outbreak was reported from the field, but as no LSD vaccine is authorized for use in Myanmar, it is feasible that unreported spread occurred in the country.”

• Please provide more background on the 13 samples that were collected for further analysis. How were the cattle / samples selected, what were the criteria, why 13?

We added the following text to explain 13 samples, “From the total of 180 cattle that appeared to be infected due to their clinical signs consistent with LSD, LBVD selected 13 with typical, advanced, nodular skin lesions for sample collection. Another field sampling criterion was practicality: some affected cattle were unused to handling and maintained at premises that lacked facilities to safely restrain adult bovines. Thus, LBVD followed a purposive sample selection procedure, based on clinical appearance and operator safety.”

• line 214-215: "all Myanmar LSDVs are identical" may be an overstatement since authors can only talk about the analyzed samples. I would suggest to rephrase.

We rephrased this by adding “…of this study…”.  It now reads as, “The multiple sequence alignments of all four targeted genes showed that all Myanmar LSDVs of this study are identical.”

• line 216: "100% similar" meaning 100% identical? otherwise, please define similar.

We edited this to, “Moreover, the EEV glycoprotein sequence alignment showed that the Myanmar LSDVs share 100% sequence identity with other LSDVs such as Bangladesh LSDV, LSDV KSGP-0240, LSDV NI-2490, and LSDV Kenya, that have a 27-nucleotide insertion (175-201).”

• line 64: what is the relevance that Myanmar states have predominant ethnic groups? Since this is research on cattle, the relevance is not immediately clear. The statement either needs more context or should be dropped.

We dropped the phrase regarding ethnic groups.