Review Reports
by
- Chuang Li 1,2,†,
- Zhiqi Lu 2,† and
- Mengzhi Wang 2,3,*
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Francisco Gerardo Véliz Deras Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript has some interesting findings, but it has some inconsistencies that need to be addressed. The most critical issue is that the title, aim, and conclusion must be aligned (growth performance is not mentioned in the title and aim but is included in the conclusion).
Also, the results need to be better presented; the figures are too small and are difficult to view.
The discussion has to be restructured; it should focus on the results obtained. In its current form, it’s a literature review when it should give possible explanations for the findings. It should also be more concise.
The conclusion should also be restructured accordingly.
English language is fine.
Author Response
Q: The most critical issue is that the title, aim, and conclusion must be aligned (growth performance is not mentioned in the title and aim but is included in the conclusion).
A: The authors have revised the aims and conclusions to be consistent with the title, aims and conclusions.
Q: Also, the results need to be better presented; the figures are too small and are difficult to view.
A: The image has been modified and the figures in the text have been appropriately enlarged.
Q: The discussion has to be restructured; it should focus on the results obtained. In its current form, it’s a literature review when it should give possible explanations for the findings. It should also be more concise.
A: Discussion section has been revised accordingly. Please review the Discussion section of the manuscript.
Q: The conclusion should also be restructured accordingly.
A: The conclusions have been adjusted accordingly. Please review the conclusions section of the manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe research work was concluded that metabolomic reports of Hu Sheep, fed mixed silage of rice straw/Chinese cabbage. The present work was well appreciated. However, few blemishes that need revision before this work can be considered for publication.
Suggested merge the subheading 2.1 into 2.2.
LN 90: NC, 2007 [insert the reference numerical]
Name of microbial species should be in Italics. Revise entire manuscript. [Ex. LN338]
Revise entire manuscript. The authors should avoid the lengthy sentences and incomplete sentences.
Enhance the Figures 2 and 3 Quality. Font size were not able to read.
The results showed that, significant increases in abundance microbes. But, why there was no potential effects on growth performance?
Abbreviations must be defined at first mention and used consistently thereafter in entire manuscript.
Write the conclusion again and be more concise to the major findings and suggestions.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Q: Suggested merge the subheading 2.1 into 2.2.
A: The author has merged 2.1 into 2.2.
Q: LN 90: NC, 2007 [insert the reference numerical].
A: The authors have inserted references here.
Q: Name of microbial species should be in Italics. Revise entire manuscript. [Ex. LN338]
A: The authors have italicized the names of microbial species in the manuscript.
Q: Revise entire manuscript. The authors should avoid the lengthy sentences and incomplete sentences.
A: The author has revised the grammar of the sentences in the text, love reviewing the manuscript.
Q: Enhance the Figures 2 and 3 Quality. Font size were not able to read.
A: The quality of Figures 2 and 3 has improved; please review Figures 2 and 3 in the text.
Q: The results showed that, significant increases in abundance microbes. But, why there was no potential effects on growth performance?
A: the experiment results of alpha diversity showed that replacement of roughage in the control group by the mixed silage did not affect the Richness, Shannon, Simpson, Chao1, ACE and good_coverage indices of the microorganisms in faeces (P > 0.05) (Supplementary Figure. 2). In addition, the authors concluded that even if an increase in the number of microorganisms occurs it does not necessarily have a positive effect on growth performance, which may be related to the function of the microorganisms.
Q: Abbreviations must be defined at first mention and used consistently thereafter in entire manuscript.
A: It has been checked and modified throughout the article.
Q: Write the conclusion again and be more concise to the major findings and suggestions.
A: The conclusion section has been reworked. Please review the conclusion section.