Peer Review History
| Original SubmissionOctober 21, 2022 |
|---|
|
Dear Marta, Thank you for submitting the revision of your Review Commons manuscript entitled "Dissecting the roles of Expansion/Rebuf and the chitin synthase Krotzkopf Verkehrt in chitin deposition in Drosophila" for consideration as a Research Article by PLOS Biology. The revision has now been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editorial staff as well as by an academic editor with relevant expertise and I am writing to let you know that we would like to send back to the original reviewers. However, before we can send your manuscript to the reviewers, we need you to complete your submission by providing the metadata that is required for full assessment. To this end, please login to Editorial Manager where you will find the paper in the 'Submissions Needing Revisions' folder on your homepage. Please click 'Revise Submission' from the Action Links and complete all additional questions in the submission questionnaire. Once your full submission is complete, your paper will undergo a series of checks in preparation for peer review. After your manuscript has passed the checks it will be sent out for review. To provide the metadata for your submission, please Login to Editorial Manager (https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology) within two working days, i.e. by Nov 02 2022 11:59PM. During the process of completing your manuscript submission, you will be invited to opt-in to posting your pre-review manuscript as a bioRxiv preprint. Visit http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/preprints for full details. If you consent to posting your current manuscript as a preprint, please upload a single Preprint PDF. Feel free to email us at plosbiology@plos.org if you have any queries relating to your submission. Kind regards, Ines -- Ines Alvarez-Garcia, PhD Senior Editor PLOS Biology |
| Revision 1 |
|
Dear Marta, Thank you for your patience while we considered your revised manuscript entitled "Dissecting the roles of Expansion/Rebuf and the chitin synthase Krotzkopf Verkehrt in chitin deposition in Drosophila" for publication as a Research Article at PLOS Biology. This revised version of your manuscript, which we received from Review Commons, has been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editors, an the Academic Editor and the original three reviewers. Based on the reviews (attached below), we are likely to accept this manuscript for publication, provided you satisfactorily address the remaining minor point raised by Reviewer 1. Please also make sure to address the data and other policy-related requests stated below. In addition, we would like you to consider a suggestion to improve the title by simplifying it a bit (feel free to suggest something else if you don't like it): "Chitin polymerisation and translocation to the extracellular space are uncoupled in Drosophila" Please also define better what Expansion and Rebuf are in the abstract. As you address these items, please take this last chance to review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the cover letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. We expect to receive your revised manuscript within two weeks. To submit your revision, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/ and log in as an Author. Click the link labelled 'Submissions Needing Revision' to find your submission record. Your revised submission must include the following: - a cover letter that should detail your responses to any editorial requests, if applicable, and whether changes have been made to the reference list - a Response to Reviewers file that provides a detailed response to the reviewers' comments (if applicable) - a track-changes file indicating any changes that you have made to the manuscript. NOTE: If Supporting Information files are included with your article, note that these are not copyedited and will be published as they are submitted. Please ensure that these files are legible and of high quality (at least 300 dpi) in an easily accessible file format. For this reason, please be aware that any references listed in an SI file will not be indexed. For more information, see our Supporting Information guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/supporting-information *Published Peer Review History* Please note that you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. Please see here for more details: https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/05/plos-journals-now-open-for-published-peer-review/ *Press* Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, please ensure you have opted out of Early Article Posting on the submission form. We ask that you notify us as soon as possible if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. *Protocols deposition* To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Best wishes, Ines -- Ines Alvarez-Garcia, PhD Senior Editor PLOS Biology ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DATA POLICY: IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ You may be aware of the PLOS Data Policy, which requires that all data be made available without restriction: http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability. For more information, please also see this editorial: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001797 Note that we do not require all raw data. Rather, we ask that all individual quantitative observations that underlie the data summarized in the figures and results of your paper be made available in one of the following forms: 1) Supplementary files (e.g., excel). Please ensure that all data files are uploaded as 'Supporting Information' and are invariably referred to (in the manuscript, figure legends, and the Description field when uploading your files) using the following format verbatim: S1 Data, S2 Data, etc. Multiple panels of a single or even several figures can be included as multiple sheets in one excel file that is saved using exactly the following convention: S1_Data.xlsx (using an underscore). 2) Deposition in a publicly available repository. Please also provide the accession code or a reviewer link so that we may view your data before publication. Regardless of the method selected, please ensure that you provide the individual numerical values that underlie the summary data displayed in the following figure panels as they are essential for readers to assess your analysis and to reproduce it: Fig. 2G; Fig. 3O; Fig. 5I; Fig. 6M, N, N’, P, Q; Fig. S5E-H NOTE: the numerical data provided should include all replicates AND the way in which the plotted mean and errors were derived (it should not present only the mean/average values). Please also ensure that figure legends in your manuscript include information on WHERE THE UNDERLYING DATA CAN BE FOUND, and ensure your supplemental data file/s has a legend. Please ensure that your Data Statement in the submission system accurately describes where your data can be found. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- BLOT AND GEL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS: We require the original, uncropped and minimally adjusted images supporting all blot and gel results reported in an article's figures or Supporting Information files. We will require these files before a manuscript can be accepted so please prepare and upload them now. Please carefully read our guidelines for how to prepare and upload this data: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reviewers' comments: Rev. 1: This is a revised manuscript and my previous comments have essentially been addressed successfully. There is a minor comment regarding the expression pattern of endogenous KKV and GFP-KKV. Figure S1. (C) In wild type embryos, endogenous KKV is apically localized, almost no intracellular KKV is observed. (d) in btl> GFP-KKV, in addition to apical localization, vesicular KKV-GFP is clearly observed. These intracellular KKV-GFP vesicles might not contribute significantly to intracellular chitin in exp reb mutants, however, this observation should be mentioned. Rev. 2: Matthias Behr – note that this reviewer has signed his review Well done. Rev. 3: This is a revised version of a previously reviewed paper. The authors have done considerable to work both experimentally and in textual and figure revisions to address the reviewer comments, which they have done successfully. The revision has significantly strengthened the paper. The manuscript is now ready for publication. |
| Revision 2 |
|
Dear Dr Llimargas, Thank you for the submission of your revised Research Article entitled "A dynamic interplay between chitin synthase and the proteins Expansion/Rebuf reveals that chitin polymerisation and translocation are uncoupled in Drosophila" for publication in PLOS Biology. On behalf of my colleagues and the Academic Editor, Emma Rawlins, I am delighted to say that we can in principle accept your manuscript for publication, provided you address any remaining formatting and reporting issues. These will be detailed in an email you should receive within 2-3 business days from our colleagues in the journal operations team; no action is required from you until then. Please note that we will not be able to formally accept your manuscript and schedule it for publication until you have completed any requested changes. Please take a minute to log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production process. PRESS We frequently collaborate with press offices. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. If the press office is planning to promote your findings, we would be grateful if they could coordinate with biologypress@plos.org. If you have previously opted in to the early version process, we ask that you notify us immediately of any press plans so that we may opt out on your behalf. We also ask that you take this opportunity to read our Embargo Policy regarding the discussion, promotion and media coverage of work that is yet to be published by PLOS. As your manuscript is not yet published, it is bound by the conditions of our Embargo Policy. Please be aware that this policy is in place both to ensure that any press coverage of your article is fully substantiated and to provide a direct link between such coverage and the published work. For full details of our Embargo Policy, please visit http://www.plos.org/about/media-inquiries/embargo-policy/. Many congratulations and thanks again for choosing PLOS Biology for publication and supporting Open Access publishing. We look forward to publishing your study. Sincerely, Ines -- Ines Alvarez-Garcia, PhD Senior Editor PLOS Biology |
Open letter on the publication of peer review reports
PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.
We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.
Learn more at ASAPbio .