Peer Review History

Original SubmissionNovember 8, 2019
Decision Letter - Judith Homberg, Editor

PONE-D-19-31125

Serotonin improves behavioral contrast sensitivity of freely moving rats

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Shimegi,

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. These comments can be found below.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Feb 17 2020 11:59PM. 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,

Judith Homberg

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

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

1. 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.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

"This work was supported by KAKENHI 22500573, 216 25282216, 25560302, and 16H01869 to S.S."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

"The author(s) received no specific funding for this work."

4. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 3 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

[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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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: The author tested the contract sensitivity of rats before and after intraperitoneal injection of serotonin re-uptake inhibitor in 2AFC-VDT behavior task. Contrast sensitivity was first found to be higher in rats after intraperitoneal injection of fluoxetine (FLX) than before in the condition on optimal special frequency of 0.1. The authors therefore concluded that endogenous 5-HT release in the brain can improve visual detectability. However, the function of FLX to inhibit 5-HTT is not directly related to the release of 5-HT, and FLX directly acts on the 5-HT receptor (Liang Peng et al Current Neuropharmacology 2014). It is better to improve the accuracy of conclusion in this study. Overall, this study suggests that FLX improves CS in rats which will provide more reference evidence for studying the relationship between 5-HT and visual information processing.

Some important points provided below might improve the accuracy of the conclusions.

1. Discuss the relationship between FLX, 5-HT and 5-HT receptors (Liang Peng et al. Current Neuropharmacology. 2014), which will help to clarify the relationship between 5-HT and visual information processing.

2. The conclusion in line 208 states that " serotonin endogenously released from the dorsal raphe nucleus...". There is no direct evidence in this article providing that 5-HT derived from DR functioning in CS , besides the major serotonergic neurons also exist in MR area (Iskra Pollak Dorocic et al. Neuron. 2014). Discussion of the serotonergic neurons projecting areas might help to improve the accuracy of the conclusion.

**********

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

[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.

Revision 1

Professor Judith Homberg

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Re: PONE-D-19-31125

Serotonin improves behavioral contrast sensitivity of freely moving rats

PLOS ONE

Dear Professor Homberg,

Thank you very much for sending us your decision and the reviewer's comments on our manuscript, "Serotonin improves behavioral contrast sensitivity of freely moving rats" by Sato et al. We appreciate the positive comments and suggestions that have helped improve our study. Accordingly, we have revised our manuscript. In the process of the revision, we found that the population data of water intake and open field test contained one rat which was used in a preliminary experiment to determine their experimental conditions and whose contrast sensitivity was not measured. Therefore, we removed data of the rat from the population data of water intake and open field, by which the number of animals became equally seven in contrast sensitivity and water intake and open field. The statistical significance of the data was not changed after this treatment. Accordingly, the relevant part of text and Fig 4 have been modified.

Details of our responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows.

Responses to Journal requirements

1. 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.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_aut

hors_affiliations.pdf

We have confirmed The PLOS ONE style templates and modified our manuscript to meet the style requirements.

2. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

We have uploaded our data to figshare, and the DOI is as follows;

DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.11845611

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

"This work was supported by KAKENHI 22500573, 216 25282216, 25560302, and 16H01869 to S.S."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

"The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

We have removed the text related funding information in the Acknowledgments section of the revised version of our manuscript. We would like to update the financial disclosure section with the following funding information; “This work was supported by KAKENHI JP22500573, JP25282216, JP25560302, and JP16H01869 to S.S, and JP17J08499 to A.Y.S.”

4. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 3 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

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

We have specified reference to Figure 3 on line 177 of the revised manuscript.

Responses to the Reviewer1

We would like to express our thanks to this reviewer for his insightful comments that have very much helped us improve the paper.

To the reviewer’s comments

1. Information about that FLX directly acts on the 5-HT receptor.

Reviewer 1 suggested discussing the activation 5-HT receptor by FLX. We have discussed this point in the Discussion section (line 236-242 in the manuscript).

2. Information about projection of dorsal raphe nucleus (DR) and median raphe nucleus (MR).

Reviewer 1 suggested discussing serotonin endogenously released from not only dorsal but also median raphe nucleus. We have discussed this point in the Discussion section (line 224-228 in the manuscript).

Again, we would like to thank you, Prof. Judith Homberg, and the reviewers for your time and feedback. We hope the revised manuscript will be now considered suitable for publication in PLOS ONE.

With best wishes,

Satoshi Shimegi

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers_SatoYA.docx
Decision Letter - Judith Homberg, Editor

Serotonin improves behavioral contrast sensitivity of freely moving rats

PONE-D-19-31125R1

Dear Dr. Shimegi,

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,

Judith Homberg

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

**********

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: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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: (No Response)

**********

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: Yes: Chao Guo

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Judith Homberg, Editor

PONE-D-19-31125R1

Serotonin improves behavioral contrast sensitivity of freely moving rats

Dear Dr. Shimegi:

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. Judith Homberg

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 .