Comparative virulome analysis of four Staphylococcus epidermidis strains from human skin and platelet concentrates using whole genome sequencing
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Virulome profile of four Staphylococcus epidermidis strains isolated from platelet concentrates and human skin.
Article activity feed
-
-
Thank you very much for submitting your revised manuscript to Access Microbiology and introducing the proposed changes. I am pleased to let you know that your manuscript is accepted and will be processed for publication. Congratulations to all authors!
-
-
Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript to Access Microbiology and congratulations to the authors for a job well done. Both reviewers and myself agree that manuscript is very well put together and is a valuable contribution to the field. There are only some minor comments to address from the reviewers. Please consider including these suggestions in the manuscript, as they can add extra value to the work.
-
Comments to Author
This was a great paper, looking at the virulome of S. epidermidis. This paper effectively achieves its aims, and will provide an invaluable resource in the study and diagnosis of S. epidermidis in the future. This paper is clear, well written, and well reasoned. I have no comments and think this paper should be accepted as is for publication. Good job!
Please rate the manuscript for methodological rigour
Very good
Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript
Very good
To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?
Strongly support
Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?
No
Is there a potential financial or …
Comments to Author
This was a great paper, looking at the virulome of S. epidermidis. This paper effectively achieves its aims, and will provide an invaluable resource in the study and diagnosis of S. epidermidis in the future. This paper is clear, well written, and well reasoned. I have no comments and think this paper should be accepted as is for publication. Good job!
Please rate the manuscript for methodological rigour
Very good
Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript
Very good
To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?
Strongly support
Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?
No
Is there a potential financial or other conflict of interest between yourself and the author(s)?
No
If this manuscript involves human and/or animal work, have the subjects been treated in an ethical manner and the authors complied with the appropriate guidelines?
Yes
-
Comments to Author
The paper is really well put together and nicely documented, both in terms of analysis and writing style. Kudos to the authors for doing such a great job piecing it all together! I think it is quite interesting that skin isolates from healthy participants would have high potential for contamination. The phylogenetic tree implies that any S. Epidermidis with the right genetic combination can cause disease. I have a few minor comments How were the public database picked? Are they picked because they are similar ST types to the 4 isolates? If it isn't too much trouble, I think a supplementary table showing what the different ST types of the 25 genomes would be helpful. The authors highlighted the presence of CRISPR elements. What type of CRISPR-Cas system? The information can be incorporated into table …
Comments to Author
The paper is really well put together and nicely documented, both in terms of analysis and writing style. Kudos to the authors for doing such a great job piecing it all together! I think it is quite interesting that skin isolates from healthy participants would have high potential for contamination. The phylogenetic tree implies that any S. Epidermidis with the right genetic combination can cause disease. I have a few minor comments How were the public database picked? Are they picked because they are similar ST types to the 4 isolates? If it isn't too much trouble, I think a supplementary table showing what the different ST types of the 25 genomes would be helpful. The authors highlighted the presence of CRISPR elements. What type of CRISPR-Cas system? The information can be incorporated into table 2. What are the prophages identified in the genome? What are the closest related phage? What is the percentage identity to the resistant genes? How does the authors define "presence" of the gene? Is it based on a predetermined coverage and percentage identity?
Please rate the manuscript for methodological rigour
Very good
Please rate the quality of the presentation and structure of the manuscript
Very good
To what extent are the conclusions supported by the data?
Strongly support
Do you have any concerns of possible image manipulation, plagiarism or any other unethical practices?
No
Is there a potential financial or other conflict of interest between yourself and the author(s)?
No
If this manuscript involves human and/or animal work, have the subjects been treated in an ethical manner and the authors complied with the appropriate guidelines?
Yes
-