Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJuly 5, 2019
Decision Letter - Wenhui Hu, Editor

PONE-D-19-18727

Ginkgo biloba extract increases neurite outgrowth via activation of the Akt/mTOR pathway

PLOS ONE

Dear Prof. Dr. ECKERT,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Sep 30, 2019. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

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. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, 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.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Wenhui Hu, M.D., Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0029-1240204

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763414000256?via%3Dihub

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed."

3.  Thank you for stating the following in the Financial Disclosure section:

This study was supported by a principal investigator- initiated research grant supported by Vifor SA, Switzerland.

We note that you received funding from a commercial source: Vifor SA, Switzerland.

Please provide an amended Competing Interests Statement that explicitly states this commercial funder, along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, marketed products, etc.

Within this Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests).  If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include your amended Competing Interests Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This manuscript by Anne Eckert and colleagues investigate the effect of the Standardized Ginkgo biloba extract (GBE) LI1370 on neuroplasticity and neurite outgrowth using SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells in a 2D and 3D surface culture. The authors evaluated parameters of neurite outgrowth and showed that GBE (10 and 100 µg/ml) significantly increased neurite outgrowth after 3 days of treatment with a comparable effect than that NGF. The investigators also showed an increase of phosphorylated IGF1R (Tyr1135/Tyr1136), Akt (Ser473), TSC2 (Ser939), mTOR (Ser2448), PTEN (Ser380) and GSK3β (Ser9) after the treatment of GBE.

Although the role of GBE in promoting dendritic growth has been confirmed by others, the mechanism is not clear and it’s attractive to explore the underlying pathways of GBE effect on the neurite outgrowth. The Luminex technology used in this manuscript is interesting, which could quantitatively detect each protein. I may have missed something important, and I was confused how the investigators drawn the conclusion that GBE promotes neurite growth via activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway. It may be appropriate to Inhibit or enhance a site in the pathway and detect changes in downstream signals.

Minor comments:

1. Please add a citation for this sentence “By generating energy, regulating subcellular calcium and redox homeostasis, mitochondria play an important role in controlling fundamental processes in neuroplasticity, including neural differentiation, neurite outgrowth, neurotransmitter release and dendritic remodeling”.

2. Please confirm whether reference 9, 10 and 24 were incorrectly cited.

3. Please confirm reference 27 has been cited at corresponding location in this manuscript.

Reviewer #2: The study is intended to investigate the intracellular signal transduction pathways involved in promoting the neuroplasticity which is targeted by GBE. The topic is a hot spot at present.

See attached file for minor linguistic errors

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: v1_MANUSCRIPT lejri et al.docx
Revision 1

Dear editors and dear reviewers,

Thank you very much for the time you took to read and review our manuscript as well as for your valuable comments which motivated us to improve our work. We are grateful for your advice and we revised our manuscript accordingly. We tried to address your comments in the best way. You can see all the changes throughout the manuscript marked in green. We changed one by one all of the requested modifications that were suggested by the reviewer 1 and we corrected the linguistic errors identified by the reviewer 2. We also adapted the title in accordance to the involvement of the Akt/ mTOR pathway discussed in the manuscript.

Especially, we modified the following:

JOURNAL REQUIREMENTS:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Response: We re-organized the manuscript according to the journal PLOS ONE's style requirements including title, author, affiliations and the manuscript body formatting guidelines. We shorted the corresponding author section with only the email as required. We modified also the figure citations in the whole manuscript (pages 10 and 11, 16 and 17).

2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0029-1240204

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763414000256?via%3Dihub

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed."

Response: We completely agree with the editors. We added some references from our own work (page 3 and 5). The section (pages 3) was shortened and rephrased.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Financial Disclosure section:

This study was supported by a principal investigator- initiated research grant supported by Vifor SA, Switzerland.

We note that you received funding from a commercial source: Vifor SA, Switzerland.

Please provide an amended Competing Interests Statement that explicitly states this commercial funder, along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, marketed products, etc.

Within this Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests). If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include your amended Competing Interests Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Response: The study was only partially supported by Vifor SA, Switzerland. To avoid any misunderstanding, the acknowledgement was removed from the manuscript.

Please now state:

Financial disclosure: This study was partly supported by a principal investigator (AE) - initiated research grant supported by Vifor Pharma Switzerland, with regard to consumables and materials as well as GBE supply. Remaining funding was provided by grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF #31003A_149728, to AE) and Synapsis Foundation - Alzheimer Research Switzerland ARS to AG, and funding from the Transfaculty Research Platform, Molecular & Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Basel. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing Interests Statement: The authors have read the journal’s policy and have the following conflicts: AE received study grants from Vifor Pharma Switzerland. Moreover AE and AG received lecturer/consultant fees from Vifor Pharma Switzerland. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

REVIEWER 1:

This manuscript by Anne Eckert and colleagues investigate the effect of the Standardized Ginkgo biloba extract (GBE) LI1370 on neuroplasticity and neurite outgrowth using SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells in a 2D and 3D surface culture. The authors evaluated parameters of neurite outgrowth and showed that GBE (10 and 100 µg/ml) significantly increased neurite outgrowth after 3 days of treatment with a comparable effect than that NGF. The investigators also showed an increase of phosphorylated IGF1R (Tyr1135/Tyr1136), Akt (Ser473), TSC2 (Ser939), mTOR (Ser2448), PTEN (Ser380) and GSK3β (Ser9) after the treatment of GBE.

Although the role of GBE in promoting dendritic growth has been confirmed by others, the mechanism is not clear and it’s attractive to explore the underlying pathways of GBE effect on the neurite outgrowth. The Luminex technology used in this manuscript is interesting, which could quantitatively detect each protein. I may have missed something important, and I was confused how the investigators drawn the conclusion that GBE promotes neurite growth via activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway. It may be appropriate to Inhibit or enhance a site in the pathway and detect changes in downstream signals.

Response: We thank the reviewer 1 for this valuable comment. We thoroughly state in the revised manuscript version that the effect of GBE on neurite outgrowth possibly involves the activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway (Pages 13 to 15). We demonstrated in our manuscript that GBE is able to improve the neurite outgrowth and to increase the phosphorylated protein involved the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway. We state that the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway seems to play an important role in the effects of GBE on neurite outgrowth (pages 13 and page 14), and that the activation of this pathway may represent one possible mechanism.

In addition, we completely agree with the reviewer 1 that further experiments are needed to dissect the exact underlying mechanisms correlating neurite outgrowth with the activation of PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway, by using “as suggested by the reviewer”, specific inhibitors, e.g: AKT inhibitor, MK2206 (Yu et al 2018 PMID: 30098550) to see if a treatment with GBE still induces the expansion of the neurite as well as activates the respective downstream signal (page 14).

Again, we thank the reviewer for this suggestion that we keep in mind for our further investigations. Accordingly, the section (pages 13 to 15) and the title were modified.

Modified title: Ginkgo biloba extract increases neurite outgrowth and activates the Akt/mTOR pathway

Minor comments:

1. Please add a citation for this sentence “By generating energy, regulating subcellular calcium and redox homeostasis, mitochondria play an important role in controlling fundamental processes in neuroplasticity, including neural differentiation, neurite outgrowth, neurotransmitter release and dendritic remodeling”.

Response: You are right, thank you. The sentence (page 3) was rephrased and the corresponding reference was added (Cheng et al 2010, PMID: 20957078)

2. Please confirm whether reference 9, 10 and 24 were incorrectly cited.

Response: We apologize for these errors and we confirm that the references 9, 10 and 24 were incorrectly cited (pages 12 and 14). We corrected and replaced with the right citation respectively (pages 12 and 14).

3. Please confirm reference 27 has been cited at corresponding location in this manuscript.

Response: Thank you for noticing our omission. We added the reference 27 (Cunha et al PMID: 20162032) at the corresponding location page 11 of our manuscript.

REVIEWER 2:

The study is intended to investigate the intracellular signal transduction pathways involved in promoting the neuroplasticity which is targeted by GBE. The topic is a hot spot at present.

See attached file for minor linguistic errors.

Response: We thank the reviewer 2 for this concern and for his/her corrections. We included his/her modifications about the general grammar and language improvement in the revised manuscript.

We thank the reviewers for their constructive criticism and most helpful comments that definitively helped to improve our manuscript. We hope that with the changes made, the manuscript is now suitable for publication.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers_10.10.19.docx
Decision Letter - Wenhui Hu, Editor

Ginkgo biloba extract increases neurite outgrowth and activates the Akt/mTOR pathway

PONE-D-19-18727R1

Dear Dr. ECKERT,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Wenhui Hu, M.D., Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The present study demonstrated that GBE could markedly promote neurite outgrowth and activited the phosphorylation of Akt, GSK3β, IGF1R, mTOR,TSC2 and PTEN,which might represent one possible important pathway. I am glad the authors have adopted my recommendations and modified the corresponding revisions to make the manuscript more rigorous.

Reviewer #2: The authors carefully addressed all raised points by reviewers

Therefore, No further comments

It's now worthy of publication

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Wenhui Hu, Editor

PONE-D-19-18727R1

Ginkgo biloba extract increases neurite outgrowth and activates the Akt/mTOR pathway

Dear Dr. ECKERT:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Wenhui Hu

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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 .