Venoms and Extracellular Vesicles: A New Frontier in Venom Biology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

 

Please, attend the suggestions included in the uploaded file.

In addition to the suggestions included in the uploaded file, please: Quote Figures 2 and 3 in the appropriate place in the text of the manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

REVIEWER 1

Comments

1. Please, attend to the suggestions included in the uploaded file.

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for the comments. The recommendations in the uploaded file have been modified as recommended and highlighted yellow in the revised manuscript. Specifically, references have been provided for the acetylcholinesterase content of scorpion venom in page 4 line 171. We also added text sections (1.2.6 &1.2.7) for venomous fish and ticks as recommended.

1. In addition to the suggestions included in the uploaded file, please: Quote Figures 2 and 3 in the appropriate place in the text of the manuscript.

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. Figures 2 and 3 are appropriately cited within the text on page 12, line 484 and page 16 lines 607, 610, & 622, respectively. The changes are highlighted yellow in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The quality of the figures should be increased as some of the figure's text is pixelized. 

 

Author Response

1. REVIEWER 2

Comment

The quality of the figures should be increased as some of the figure's text is pixelized.

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The figures quality and pixel have significantly been improved in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review is a nice summary over the field and was written well. However, the authors should considerably tone down their enthusiasm about omics techniques and speak about their respective limitations. First of all, databases for such animals are highly incomplete or non-existent. Conclusively, especially proteomics, has major difficulties in correctly assigning sequencies. Furthermore, there are the known issues about proteforms, limit of detection and so forth. These problems warrant a paragraph including recent critical publications.

Minor:

Abstract: exposomes??

P2: "600 venomous species"?   It should be many more. Probably”known venomous species”

“thoroughly characterized using proteomics and transcriptomics technologies" - see my comments above

P4: “(add reference)”

P5 “play a crucial role in pollination within pollination role”

Fig. 2: writing too small

Author Response

1. REVIEWER 3

Comments

1. The review is a nice summary over the field and was written well. However, the authors should considerably tone down their enthusiasm about omics techniques and speak about their respective limitations. First of all, databases for such animals are highly incomplete or non-existent. Conclusively, especially proteomics, has major difficulties in correctly assigning sequencies. Furthermore, there are the known issues about proteforms, limit of detection and so forth. These problems warrant a paragraph including recent critical publications.

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for these important comments. We added a limitation section where we discussed the limitations in the EV filed as well as omics approaches. The limitation section is highlighted yellow on page 16, line 669 - 689 in the revised manuscript. We also added text sections (1.2.6 &1.2.7) for venomous fish and ticks as recommended.

1. Minor:

-Abstract: exposomes??

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The word has been deleted for clarity of the statement

-P2: "600 venomous species"?   It should be many more. Probably”known venomous species”

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The phrase has been modified as recommended and highlighted yellow in the revised manuscript

-“thoroughly characterized using proteomics and transcriptomics technologies" - see my comments above

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The sentence has been modified as recommended and highlighted yellow in the revised manuscript

-P4: “(add reference)”

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The reference has been added and highlighted yellow in the revised manuscript

-P5 “play a crucial role in pollination within pollination role”

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The phrase has been modified as recommended and highlighted yellow in the revised manuscript

 

-Fig. 2: writing too small

 

Author's Response

We thank the reviewer for this comment. The figures quality and pixel have significantly been improved in the revised manuscript.