Effect of Bacillus Probiotics on the Immunological Responses of Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus): A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The content and the results of the submitted manuscript are on the role of Bacillus probiotics on the immulogical responses of Nile tilapia. The work reports a detailed and long examination of the papers published on this topics; however there are some not clear points to be reconsidered.
Lines 110: in Table 1 why did you put initial weight if you did not put the final weight? There are different errors inside the table and its title should be more precise: The effects of Bacillus spp. on Nile tilapia immunological feed back.........
Lines 147: it is ok to cite different papers on aquatic animals but you should avoid to cite works on terrestrial animals as ref. 73 unless necessary.
Line 187: 4. Mode of action: it could be better to make a scheme
Line 295: Figure 2 is too complex. It would be better to simplify
Lines 334-336: be more clear: the addiction of E. faecium………did not………........ an immulogical resistance of Enterococcus strain.
Line 359: you should use the entire words the first time you use ROS.
References: there are different mistakesin in ref. 39; ref. 139: it missed the ref: Aquaculture 528: 735542; Ref. 160 is wrong in the references in fact the paper was published in 2012 and not in 2023.
After a minor revision the paper can be accepted.
The quality of English is on the average
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This review contains all important information regarding the role of Bacillus in Nile tilapia, but a good part of the text is not well structured (see my comments below). Authors must rewrite some parts of the text in which they just placed the description of several studies but did not interpreted the results of these studies, as they did in section 5.
line 34: this reference is ten years old. Replace for another one more recent. Authors can check the last reports from FAO
line 45: reference 7 is related to poultry and not fish, remove it
line 67: I think reference 56 could be cited here and check also
Isolation of Potential Probiotic Bacillus spp. from the Intestine of Nile Tilapia to Construct Recombinant Probiotic Expressing CC Chemokine and Its Effectiveness on Innate Immune Responses in Nile Tilapia. Animals, 13(6), 986, 2023
lines 87-89: scientific names and genera must be in italics
line 111: Table 1 must be cited in the text and it is not in the right place. It must be close to item 5
lines 131-137: these sentences seem out of place here
lines 138-171: authors should rewrite these lines. They just listed descriptions of studies one by one, they should integrate the results. In addition, some sentences are even not related to this specific subitem (gut microbiota). For examples, lines 152-157, 162-166.
lines 172-178: ok, correct, but what is the relationship with gut microbiota? This paragraph must be more integrated with the next one.
lines 183-188: these sentences are a repetition of the previous paragraph, except the first sentence, which is not related to the subject of study (probiotics)
line 189: "mode of action" implies effects in general, and this subitem seems more related to bacterial infections
line 250: the subitem 5 is written as I think the remaining of the review should be. I just think that 5.5 should not be within this subitem, but separate.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript has improved, but I think there are still some details to be adjusted.
lines 128-129: please describe which alteration occurred - Did it improve the immune system?
lines 130-168: these lines remained basically the same as the previous version. Let me place an example of how the text can be changed and better integrated:
Studies have shown that using Bacillus probiotics can significantly increase the number of beneficial bacteria in the gut of Nile tilapia. These beneficial bacteria can help promote better digestion and absorption of nutrients and reduce the risk of disease [63]. For example, dietary administration of Bacillus probiotic (Bacillus cereus) increased beneficial bacteria such as Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Enterococcus species and decreased pathogenic bacteria such as Aeromonas and Vibrio species [27].
So, check the remaining sentences of these lines and adjust the text.
linea 173 and 198: this is figure 1 and not 3.
item 6: table 1 must be cited here also, because it contains data regarding oxidative stress.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
