Effects of Ganoderma lucidum Powder on the Growth Performance, Immune Organ Weights, Cecal Microbiology, Serum Immunoglobulins, and Tibia Minerals of Broiler Chickens
, Yaneisy GarcÃa 3, Yanelys GarcÃa 3 and Yordan MartÃnez 3,4,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThere are some suggestions to attend in the attached file
The most important suggestion is that english redaction and style should be checked by an english native speaker
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
There are some suggestions to attend in the attached file
The most important suggestion is that english redaction and style should be checked by an english native speaker
Author Response
Reviewer 1
Suggestions for author: The most important suggestion is that English redaction and style should be checked by an English native speaker.
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript. We have further improved the quality of the English writing to better understand our revised manuscript. Please note that all the changes are indicated in red color.
2.5 Growth performance: Was body of birds individually recorded?
Response: The body weight was measured per replicate. We have modified in the revised manuscript (2.5 Growth performance).
L 215: Caeca
Response: Thanks for your correction. We have corrected it in the revised manuscript (Section 3.2, L211).
L 266: Are they secondary metabolites or fiber?
Response: We have revised this statement for better clarification.
L 262-264: The scientific hypothesis is that G. lucidum is attributed to its diversity in chemical composition; triterpenoids and other bioactive compounds are the main secondary metabolites.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSearching natural alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) in animals are one of hot topics. This manuscript demonstrated a very positive results of such issues. However, the fungus (G. lucidum) used in this experiment should have more explanation about the ingredients and compositions.
The first sentence of Introduction section "The poultry industry is one of the most important in the livestock sector---" is not understandable and should revised.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe English writing should be carefully edited, I think.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
Searching natural alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) in animals are one of hot topics. This manuscript demonstrated a very positive results of such issues. However, the fungus (G. lucidum) used in this experiment should have more explanation about the ingredients and compositions.
Response: We would like to thank you for your comments and positive feedback on our manuscript. In addition, we have also added the chemical composition of G. lucidum in the revised manuscript.
L 98-100: The GLP contained 10.60% dry matter, 9.81% crude protein, 2.83% ash, 0.32% calcium, 0.19% magnesium, 0.10% phosphorus, 0.49% potassium, 5.01 mg/kg copper, and 32.67% zinc.
The first sentence of Introduction section "The poultry industry is one of the most important in the livestock sector---" is not understandable and should revised.
Response: Thanks for your comment. We have rewritten this sentence for better clarity and carefully revised the whole manuscript to improve the quality of English.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis work aimed to demonstrate that G.lucidum powder (GLP) has a positive response in body weight gain, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio in broilers up to 32 days old without provoking morbidity and mortality. Studies on the use of G.lucidum powder (GLP) as a natural growth promoter in animals are insufficient, hence the increased interest in this work.
Regarding Abstract:
The abstract seems balanced and clarifies how the work was carried out, presenting the main results and conclusions. However, it should be noted that the presentation of the results must be adjusted following what will be mentioned later.
Lines 33-34: “The results showed that the 0.2% GLP group had an increased body weight and decreased feed intake and feed conversion ratio in broilers compared to the control group (p < 0.05).”- must be changed.
Regarding Introduction:
Line: 57 - The differing regulatory stance on the use of growth promoters in Europe compared to common practices in China should be addressed. Including this content is justified by the serious concerns associated with the improper use of growth promoters in animal production, such as the rise in antibiotic resistance and potential implications within the "One Health" concept.
On line Lines 68-71, it is stated:- “Recent studies demonstrated that the different secondary metabolites produced by fungi could improve the function of the gastrointestinal tract and the cholesterol metabolism of poultry [11]. Such bioactive compounds have the potential for use as natural feed additives, thereby improving the productive performances of the poultry system [1]”
On lines 76-78, it is stated: “G. lucidum has been identified as a rich source of triterpenes, saponins, steroids, alkaloids, ganodic acid, and β-glucans, which are used by the immune system to detoxify the organism [14]. Several previous studies showed that the alcoholic extract of G. lucidum improves feed conversion and viability of broiler chickens [15].”
It is suggested that the text between lines 68 and 78 be revised. The two sentences should be placed consecutively to ensure the reader clearly understands which bioactive compounds are being referenced.
Regarding Results:
On Line 194-198, it is stated: “At the finisher stage (19 32 days), dietary supplementation with 0.2% GLP promoted (p < 0.05) the BW broiler chickens compared to the control and 0.3% GLP groups. In addition, dietary GLP supplementation (0.2 and 0.3%) improved feed efficiency (FCR) related to the control and AGP groups (p < 0.05), with no changes for viability among the different experimental treatments (p > 0.05).”
This sentence should be revised to reflect the following: From the analysis of Table 2, the FCR at the finisher stage (19-32 days) in both dietary GLP supplementation groups and the AGP group is improved compared to the control group. However, this improvement is only significant (p < 0.05) for the AGP group and the dietary GLP supplementation (0.2%) group. The FCR in the dietary GLP supplementation (0.3%) group is statistically similar to all other groups.
- Please, don´t forget to take this into account on the abstract.
Conclusion:
The conclusion largely repeats the main results. It should be revised to focus on the findings specifically related to supplementation with G. lucidum powder (GLP).
Author Response
Reviewer 3
This work aimed to demonstrate that G.lucidum powder (GLP) has a positive response in body weight gain, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio in broilers up to 32 days old without provoking morbidity and mortality. Studies on the use of G.lucidum powder (GLP) as a natural growth promoter in animals are insufficient, hence the increased interest in this work.
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for your precious time to comments and suggestions on our manuscript. All comments and suggestions from the reviewer are valuable and insightful to improve the quality of our manuscript. We have read all comments and suggestions carefully and made revisions accordingly. Please note that all changes in the revised manuscript are marked in red color.
Regarding Abstract:
The abstract seems balanced and clarifies how the work was carried out, presenting the main results and conclusions. However, it should be noted that the presentation of the results must be adjusted following what will be mentioned later.
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for your valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of our manuscript.
Lines 33-34: “The results showed that the 0.2% GLP group had an increased body weight and decreased feed intake and feed conversion ratio in broilers compared to the control group (p < 0.05).”- must be changed.
Response: Thanks for your corrections. We have checked the results carefully and revised them accordingly.
L 32-37: The results showed that dietary 0.2% GLP supplementation increased body weight compared to the control and 0.3% GLP groups and decreased feed conversion ratio (FCR) in broilers compared to the control group during 19-32 days (p < 0.05). The feed intake was lower (p < 0.05) in both dietary GLP supplementation groups and the AGP group during 1-8 and 1-32 days compared to the control group. Additionally, the FCR was lower in both dietary GLP supplementation group (0.2%) and the AGP group (p < 0.05) compared to the control group.
Regarding Introduction:
Line: 57 - The differing regulatory stance on the use of growth promoters in Europe compared to common practices in China should be addressed. Including this content is justified by the serious concerns associated with the improper use of growth promoters in animal production, such as the rise in antibiotic resistance and potential implications within the "One Health" concept.
Response: Thanks for your insightful suggestions. We have modified this part.
L 62-66: With the ban on the use of AGP, many producers and researchers are looking for AGP alternative feed additives, especially to achieve effective control of mortality and improve feed conversion rates in the poultry industry [6]. Among the possible antibiotic alternatives in poultry production, prebiotics, probiotics, symbiotics, postbiotics, phytobiotics, and acidifiers have been extensively studied.
On line Lines 68-71, it is stated:- “Recent studies demonstrated that the different secondary metabolites produced by fungi could improve the function of the gastrointestinal tract and the cholesterol metabolism of poultry [11]. Such bioactive compounds have the potential for use as natural feed additives, thereby improving the productive performances of the poultry system [1]”
On lines 76-78, it is stated: “G. lucidum has been identified as a rich source of triterpenes, saponins, steroids, alkaloids, ganodic acid, and β-glucans, which are used by the immune system to detoxify the organism [14]. Several previous studies showed that the alcoholic extract of G. lucidum improves feed conversion and viability of broiler chickens [15].”
It is suggested that the text between lines 68 and 78 be revised. The two sentences should be placed consecutively to ensure the reader clearly understands which bioactive compounds are being referenced.
Response: Thanks for your insightful suggestions. We have modified these two statements based on the reviewer's suggestions.
Regarding Results:
On Line 194-198, it is stated: “At the finisher stage (19 32 days), dietary supplementation with 0.2% GLP promoted (p < 0.05) the BW broiler chickens compared to the control and 0.3% GLP groups. In addition, dietary GLP supplementation (0.2 and 0.3%) improved feed efficiency (FCR) related to the control and AGP groups (p < 0.05), with no changes for viability among the different experimental treatments (p > 0.05).”
This sentence should be revised to reflect the following: From the analysis of Table 2, the FCR at the finisher stage (19-32 days) in both dietary GLP supplementation groups and the AGP group is improved compared to the control group. However, this improvement is only significant (p < 0.05) for the AGP group and the dietary GLP supplementation (0.2%) group. The FCR in the dietary GLP supplementation (0.3%) group is statistically similar to all other groups.
- Please, don´t forget to take this into account on the abstract.
Response: Thanks for your detailed comments and suggestions. We have modified it according to the reviewer's suggestions. Also, revised in the abstract.
L 192-196: From the analysis of Table 2, the FCR at the finishing stage (19-32 days) in both dietary GLP supplementation groups and the AGP group was improved compared to the control group. However, this improvement was only significant (p < 0.05) for the AGP and the dietary GLP supplementation (0.2%) group. The FCR in the dietary GLP supplementation (0.3%) group was statistically similar to all other groups.
Conclusion:
The conclusion largely repeats the main results. It should be revised to focus on the findings specifically related to supplementation with G. lucidum powder (GLP).
Response: Thanks for your insightful suggestions. We have rewritten the conclusion for better clarification.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have complied with the suggested revisions.
