Next Article in Journal
Impacts of Tillage Practices on Growth, Phosphorus Uptake, and Yield of Maize in Controlled and Field-Based Studies in Relation to Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi
Previous Article in Journal
Univariate and Multivariate Statistical Analysis of Microbiome Data: An Overview
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Optimization of Probiotic Lactobacilli Production for In-Feed Supplementation to Feedlot Cattle

Appl. Microbiol. 2023, 3(2), 339-357; https://doi.org/10.3390/applmicrobiol3020024
by Cecilia Aristimuño Ficoseco, Flavia I. Mansilla, Graciela M. Vignolo * and María E. Fátima Nader-Macías
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Microbiol. 2023, 3(2), 339-357; https://doi.org/10.3390/applmicrobiol3020024
Submission received: 6 March 2023 / Revised: 23 March 2023 / Accepted: 28 March 2023 / Published: 30 March 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors presented an interesting topic about probiotics and optimization of growth conditions of such bacteria. However, there are still some comments that need to be addressed in the manuscript: 

In the results section:

1- figure 1,3: you need to show the legend on both axes of the figure, the resolution needs to be improved. Revise the figure legend.

 

2- please revise the typing errors in your figures and tables. And probably the whole manuscript.

The conclusion is not informative, you did not define specific results in it, please rewrite. it is an important part of your research paper as it gives the reader a brief 3remark about the most prominent results obtained from the research experiment, not just general information.  

Author Response

     

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Respected Authors,

Thank you for the possibility to read your manuscript and evaluate it. Fortunately, the manuscript is prepared very well. 

I have only one comment for your issue. In my opinion, the figures are little bit unclear. Is it possible to sign the statistically significant differences between the culture medias directly in the table 2 or figures?

Then, I would like to point on the large number of the current literature resources.

Best Regards,

Reviewer

Author Response

Dear Editor

The answers to the reviewer´s comments are as follows:

Reviewer 2.

Thank you for the possibility to read your manuscript and evaluate it. Fortunately, the manuscript is prepared very well. 

I have only one comment for your issue. In my opinion, the figures are little bit unclear. Is it possible to sign the statistically significant differences between the culture medias directly in the table 2 or figures?

The statistically significant differences were added to the Figure 1 and table 2.

Then, I would like to point on the large number of the current literature resources.

The experimental work and results of the manuscript require many references to discuss and justify results. Is very difficult to reduce the number of references.

Hoping the modifications perfomed to the manuscript allow the acceptance in the MDPI Issus

Sincerely yours

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop