Next Article in Journal
Acknowledgment to the Reviewers of Journal of Fungi in 2022
Next Article in Special Issue
Polyketides as Secondary Metabolites from the Genus Aspergillus
Previous Article in Journal
Deciphering the Role of PIG1 and DHN-Melanin in Scedosporium apiospermum Conidia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Uniting the Role of Endophytic Fungi against Plant Pathogens and Their Interaction
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Chemical Investigation of Endophytic Diaporthe unshiuensis YSP3 Reveals New Antibacterial and Cytotoxic Agents

J. Fungi 2023, 9(2), 136; https://doi.org/10.3390/jof9020136
by Babar Khan 1,2,†, Yu Li 1,2,†, Wei Wei 3, Guiyou Liu 3, Cheng Xiao 1,2, Bo He 1,2, Chen Zhang 1,2, Nasir Ahmed Rajput 4, Yonghao Ye 1,2,* and Wei Yan 1,2,*
Reviewer 1:
J. Fungi 2023, 9(2), 136; https://doi.org/10.3390/jof9020136
Submission received: 1 December 2022 / Revised: 13 January 2023 / Accepted: 17 January 2023 / Published: 19 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Emerging Investigators in Bioactive Fungal Metabolites)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is interesting, quite well witten and organized; interesting are the data reported, which look properly analyzed. Some notes are on the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript "Chemical investigation of endophytic Diaporthe unshiuensis YSP3 reveals new antibacterial and cytotoxic agents" (JofF-2103647) describes the isolation of twelve compounds from an endophytic fungus: four novel compounds and eight yet known. The work is well done and interesting, but some concerns should be addressed before publication.

An important problem is that the authors use two tumor lines to check the cytotoxicity of the compounds, but they do not include any normal cell line in the assay so that it can be known if there is a difference between this line and the two tumor lines. I believe that this data is necessary to have a complete picture of the possible usefulness of the new compounds.

Another point is that the antimicrobial activity is contrasted against three species of bacteria (the fourth is a variety), without justifying the choice of these. Obviously, all of them are phytopathogenic bacteria, but what is relevant for a possible widespread use is that Bacillus subtilis is Gram-positive and the other three are Gram-negative. And that is not mentioned anywhere...

Other aspects that may help to improve the manuscript are listed below:

- Line 23. Keywords are usually ordered in an alphabetical manner.

- Line 39. “phytopathgens” must be changed to phytopathogens.

- Lines 39-40. “pathogens of other mammals”. Please, delete “other”.

- Line 44. “anti-IAV”. IAV has not been described before.

- Line 47. “alkaloids, and fatty acid”. It is plural, fatty acids.

- Line 71. “5μm”. Please, separate amount and unit, as has been done in the rest of the document.

- Line 85. “with pieces of the mycelia“. It is singular: mycelium.

- Line 249. Please, separate Table 2 and the paragraph beginning at line 249.

- Line 284. “posi-tive control “. Please, change to “positive control”.

- Table 3.  MIC (μg/ml). Please change the unit for liter to L as has been done in the rest of the document.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop