Pseudomonas aeruginosa Response to Acidic Stress and Imipenem Resistance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors, 

 

I have completed a review of your submission entitled "Pseudomonas aeruginosa response to acidic stress and 2 imipenem resistance". This contains important results. But, I noticed minor revisions are needed. Here are my comments and suggestions:

1- Minor typing mistakes needs revision 

2- MIC Determination for Imipenem: Muller Hinton agar with two-fold concentrations starting 116 from 16 µg/mL to 2 µg/mL. Then it was mentioned that plates were examined on the basis of inhibition (susceptible ≤ 1μg/mL, intermediate 2 μg/mL and resistant ≥ 4 μg/mL). How susceptible was reported when it was mentioned that the lowest tested concentration was 2 µg/mL?

3- Line 125: change [25] to O'Toole [25].

4- All bacterial names must be italic starting from the title

5- Revise the IUPAC units throughout the manuscript 

6- Line 155: change (18) to [18]

7- Line 177: correct 1.10 dilutions

8- Line 178: change gram- negative to Gram-negative 

9- Standard deviation must be reported in table 1

10- Error bars must be added in figure 4

11- Revise the details added from line 341 to line 369

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,                                                                 Dated: 18^th Aug, 2022

Applied Sciences

 

I am pleased and obliged to submit the revised draft of the manuscript entitled “Pseudomonas aeruginosa response to acidic stress and imipenem resistance” to Applied Sciences. I am deeply thankful to you and esteemed  We have put our best efforts to entertain all the comments raised by you, Changes made have been highlighted in the revised manuscript. Further constructive comments if any are welcomed. I hope that the revised manuscript will meet your high standards.

Thank You

Regards 

Faraz Ahmed

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

 On account of the manuscript APPLSCI-1855306, entitled “Pseudomonas aeruginosa response to acidic stress and imipenem resistance” by Faraz Ahmed et al., the authors investigated the phenotypic heterogeneity and hetero-resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) to acidic stress and imipenem, and evaluated the potential of biofilm formation under different pH. The topic is important to better understanding of human health management of P. aeruginosa. After careful consideration, I feel that this manuscript is to be published after improvement of some major shortcomings. Details of my comments are as follows:

 

1) The view point of this research is interesting, and the authors got interesting results. Several important revisions are, however, required before publication. The first one is novelty of the research. Although the authors mentioned the aim of this study, the new aspect or view point focused on this research was not clearly stated in the manuscript. Therefore, the authors are strongly encouraged to mention the new points and/or novel aspects or viewpoints which surpass the previous researches in the manuscript clearly.

 

2) Another notable aspect is in the Abstract. The authors are encouraged to connect each contents without dividing each heading (Objective(s), Materials and Methods, Results, Conclusion).

 

 

3) Institutional Review Board Statement, Informed Consent Statement, and Data Availability Statement: If there are no applicable items in these sections, please delete them or write not applicable.

Author Response

Dear Respected,

Reviewer,                                                                                                         

Applied Sciences

 

I am pleased and obliged to submit the revised draft of the manuscript entitled “Pseudomonas aeruginosa response to acidic stress and imipenem resistance” to Applied Sciences. I am deeply thankful to you for your insightful feedback. We have put our best efforts to entertain all the comments raised by you. Changes made have been highlighted in the revised manuscript. Further constructive comments if any are welcomed. I hope that the revised manuscript will meet your high standards.

 

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

  On account of the manuscript APPLSCI-1855306R1, entitled “Pseudomonas aeruginosa response to acidic stress and imipenem resistance” by Faraz Ahmed et al., the authors revised the manuscript appropriately according to the Reviewers comments. After careful consideration, I made a decision that the manuscript is acceptable for publication in its present form.