Next Article in Journal
Acute Pyelonephritis with Bacteremia in an 89-Year-Old Woman Caused by Two Slow-Growing Bacteria: Aerococcus urinae and Actinotignum schaalii
Previous Article in Journal
The Mite Steatonyssus periblepharus Is a Novel Potential Vector of the Bat Parasite Trypanosoma dionisii
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Transreplication Preference of the Tomato Leaf Curl Joydebpur Virus for a Noncognate Betasatellite through Iteron Resemblance on Nicotiana bethamiana

Microorganisms 2023, 11(12), 2907; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11122907
by Thuy T. B. Vo 1,†, I Gusti Ngurah Prabu Wira Sanjaya 1,†, Eui-Joon Kil 2, Aamir Lal 2, Phuong T. Ho 1, Bupi Nattanong 1, Marjia Tabassum 1, Muhammad Amir Qureshi 1, Taek-Kyun Lee 3,* and Sukchan Lee 1,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Microorganisms 2023, 11(12), 2907; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11122907
Submission received: 31 October 2023 / Revised: 22 November 2023 / Accepted: 28 November 2023 / Published: 1 December 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors


Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language


Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The presented work is sufficiently equipped with experimental data which is eligible to be used for further understanding of the interaction between monopartite begomoviruses and their associated DNA satellites. It also particularly emphasizes the iteron sequence’s role and direction.

However, minor typos and inaccuracies are still present and are listed below:

Line 62 – Missing space.

Line 69 – CR presented as an undeciphered abbreviation (common region).

Figure 1 – Illustration «B» is irrelevant and should be necessarily included.

Figure 3 – In illustration «B» negative control symbol isn’t the same as in the text below.

Line 306 – Missing space.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Line 62 – Missing space.

  • The space has been added in the main text.

Line 69 – CR presented as an undeciphered abbreviation (common region).

  • The full name of CR has been mentioned in the text.

Figure 1 – Illustration «B» is irrelevant and should be necessarily included.

  • In this figure, we just want to indicate exactly the place where we collected samples

Figure 3 – In illustration «B» negative control symbol isn’t the same as in the text below.

  • The Negative control symbol in the text has been changed to be same as Figure 3.

Line 306 – Missing space.

  • The space has been added in the main text.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

L281; recombination analysis is not performed in the revised version

Fig 5; Detection of betasatellite in mock plant

L300: Demonstration of symptoms

Additionally, there are some more problems as;

Fig 1; which marker was used?

L436-437; Sentence looks incomplete 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

My expertise might be limited, but there's room for improvement in the English quality of certain sentences.

Author Response

L281; recombination analysis is not performed in the revised version

  • The recombination analysis has been mentioned in the main text for viral detection part.

Fig 5; Detection of betasatellite in mock plant

  • The betasatellite was not detected in mock plants. As we explained in previous revised version, the mock plants got contamination because of our our careless after we rechecked the data. Then we processed new qPCR with the same mock plants that we kept in -80degree freezer, and this time no betasatellite was found.

L300: Demonstration of symptoms

  • The symptoms of mutant clone infected plants have been described in the main text.

Fig 1; which marker was used?

  • We used 100 bp ladder marker and mentioned it in the Figure 1 legend.

L436-437; Sentence looks incomplete 

  • According to line number of the latest revised manuscript, the line 436-437 is placed at beginning of Supplementary material part and we did not see the incomplete sentences. We just confused there is mistake in the line number that reviewer mentioned.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop