Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Referee Comments: Referee 1

Posted by PLOS_ONE_Group on 09 Aug 2007 at 22:42 GMT

Reviewer 1's Review

The paper is nice, in my humble opinion. My compliments to you. I have written some little advice that might prove relevant to improve, after very minor revision, what you have done.

The presence of supplementary mouths or bifurcated tentacles can be normal (as it happens in Gastroblasta medusae, with multiple mouths, or in Cladonema, with bifurcated tentacles in the medusa, or in Cladocoryne, with bifurcated tentacles in the polyp). In the paper on Codonorchis I naively suggested that the multiple manubria that were observed in the senescent medusa might be due to the activation of genes leading to clonal morphs in the polyp stage. The "do it again" genes that make up the colony might have entered into action in the medusa, when some silencing of them became not so efficient. This passage of information from the polyp to the medusa, with mosaics of morphs, might be conducive to the formation of new bauplans, as I suggested also in the paper on the cnidarian premises of metazoan evolution and in other papers I published on the same subject. Mine were just wild speculations, you have the molecular evidence for them. After all, however, I imagined (without having any proof, besides comparative analyses) that such things might happen. However, if you think that this is squeezing my papers too much, you are free to ignore them.

N.B. These are the general comments made by the reviewer when reviewing this paper. Specific points addressed during revision of the paper are not shown.