Prospects of Phage DJ6712 and FW6709 in Biocontrol of Aeromonas veronii in Fish Aquaculture

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript “Prospects of phage DJ6712 and FW6709 in biocontrol of Aeromonas veronii in fish aquaculture” presents relevant and original work on A. veronii phages, an underexplored topic in aquaculture health. The experimental approach is adequate, but the paper requires major revision to improve methodological clarity and scientific precision.

The main concern is the confusion between bacterial and phage isolation steps in Section 2.1, where the workflow is not clearly separated. As written, it suggests that phages were isolated directly from archived bacterial strains, which is conceptually incorrect. The authors should clearly describe that the bacterial isolates (AH67, AH68, AH82) were characterized first and later used as host strains for phage enrichment from environmental samples, providing full details on enrichment conditions, controls, and replication.

Additionally, the manuscript needs quantitative data (PFU/mL, OD₆₀₀ reduction, standard deviations) instead of qualitative indicators (+, ++). Figures and tables should include proper scales, legends, and replicates. The discussion, while comprehensive, should highlight study limitations (absence of in vivo validation and genomic analysis) and discuss environmental and regulatory aspects of phage application.

Overall, the study is promising and scientifically relevant, but it requires a more rigorous methodological description and clearer distinction between bacterial and viral procedures before publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this study, bacteriophages against the fish pathogen Aeromonas veronii were isolated and characterized. Two phages showed high host bacterial growth inhibition and one of the phages demonstrated high temperature and pH tolerance.

The study is well performed, the Introduction cites most of the relevant articles available on the subject, and the Materials and Methods section is sufficiently detailed, and where not detailed, relevant articles are cited. The Results are clearly presented and the Discussion summarizes the value of the results obtained. The study may be an important contribution to the fish aquaculture.

I look forward to see the results of in vivo studies following these optimistic introductory results.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the work. 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors implemented all the suggestions.