Genomic and Phenotypic Analysis of Linezolid-Resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis in a Tertiary Hospital in Innsbruck, Austria
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please add if the data are tested for normal distribution (eg. with Shapiro-Wilk test or similar).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript by Huber and colleagues reports on the whole genome sequence analysis of a large collection of Staph. epidermidis isolates to understand the basis of linezolid resistance in this taxon. The data are well presented (although a couple of clarifications are requested) and informative. The comments below are primarily language suggestions.
- L16. By specifically stating “Gram positive”, this could be interpreted to mean that WGS analysis is not appropriate for Gram negatives. Perhaps just use “in bacteria”?
- L17 sequence types
- L19 and throughout. These mutations are in the “23S rRNA gene” rather than having a “T” in 23S rRNA. Also, in lines 306 and 353 the Svedberg abbreviation is not capitalized (please check throughout).
- L34 of SE has increased
- L79. Please include the MALDI platform (Bruker?)
- L84. Do the authors mean “appropriately” rather than “adequately”?
- L92 Introduce “Qiagen” here. Also, depending on journal policy, locations of companies may be required on first use (see also L100 where Illumina location may need to be provided).
- L67 insert the abbreviation “MUI” here as the abbreviation is not introduced before first use L89
- L103 were performed
- L136 Collection (to match capitalization of other sections). This may also be needed for ‘dependent’ L269.
- L157 was performed with a reduced (two changes)
- L179 48 recorded no
- Table 1 cfr should either be capitalized for protein) or italicized (for gene)
- L201 and L203. The authors should mention why these annotations are in quotation marks.
- L201-L203. It is not clear to what extent a sequence or contig matches a plasmid. Are the authors indicating that a whole plasmid contig matched a plasmid? Or if cfr was found on a contig with a specific rep gene, was it called as a plasmid? These few sentences need to be expanded upon/clarified, so that the reader can evaluate how the contigs or cfr sequences are assigned to plasmids.
- L202 558 should be italicized
- L222 two were classified
- L234 Novel variants in the 23S rRNA gene
- L246 fluoroquinolone L247 tigercycine
- L250 In contrast
- L271 prior to
- L273 resulting in no significant
- L279. Please provide a reference for the WHO recommendation
- L278 WGS has become a
- L287 Of note, the 23S rRNA gene
- L289 five copies of the 23S rRNA gene L292 23S rRNA gene
- L353 mechanisms such as L363 such as cfr
- L396 Bioproject
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf