PONE-D-21-10409

Comparative study regarding the differences in bacterial resistance after approximately 13 years

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Zhang,

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.

==============================

ACADEMIC EDITOR: A major revision is needed.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 07 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're 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.

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). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. 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.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Abdelazeem Mohamed Algammal, Prof, Ph.D

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

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

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

[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: Yes

**********

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: No

**********

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: Comments to authors:

- The current study is interesting; however, the authors should address the below-outlined comments:

- The manuscript should be revised for language editing and grammar mistakes.

-Please write the scientific names of bacterial pathogens in correct form all over the manuscript (italic form).

Title:

I think the work would benefit from the title that contains main conclusion of the study (should be derived from the conclusion), please modify the title.

Abstract:

- The abstract must illustrate the main conclusion of your study (please improve).

Introduction: (It needs to be more informative)

-Please give a hint about the virulence determinants, the pathogenesis, and diseases caused by S. aureus, E. coli, Acinetobacter baumannii, and K. pneumonia.

-The authors should illustrate the public health importance concerning the emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial pathogens. Several studies proved the widespread MDR- bacterial pathogens;

Authors could add the following paragraph and use the following references:

Multidrug resistance has been increased globally that is considered a public health threat. Several previous studies revealed the emergence of multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogens from different origins especially fish, birds, animals, and food chains which may be transmitted to human consumers resulting in severe illness.

You could use and cite the following valuable recent studies:

1-PMID: 32497922 ; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32497922/

2-PMID: 32397408 ; https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/9/5/362

3-PMID: 30150182 ; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30150182/

4-PMID: 32532070 DOI: 10.3390/toxins12060383

5-PMID: 32235800 DOI: 10.3390/pathogens9030238

6-PMID: 32472209 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-020-01037-z

7-PMID: 32994450 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-72264-4

8-El-Sayed M, Algammal A, Abouel-Atta M, Mabrok M, Emam A. Pathogenicity, genetic typing, and antibiotic sensitivity of Vibrio alginolyticus isolated from Oreochromis niloticus and Tilapia zillii. Rev. Med. Vet. 2019 Jan 1; 170:80-6.

-Rephrase the aim of work to be clearer and sound better.

Material and methods

-Add more data about the Source of specimens (sex, age, disease…ect.)

- The subtitle: Bacteria isolation and identification, should modified to be:

Isolation and identification of bacterial pathogens

-Add specific references to the Isolation and identification of bacterial pathogens, enumerate the used biochemical reactions, add the company names and countries of the used bacterial media.

- Update the CLSI reference, use 2018 version.

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Besides, please illustrate in the text the reasons for the selection of these antimicrobial agents.

-Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) should be performed to illustrate the genetic relatedness between the recovered isolates. If it's not applicable please add it to the study limitations.

-Results:

- Good presentation; however, please support your results with illustrating figures.

-Table 2: -Please write the scientific names of bacterial pathogens in correct form (italic form).

-Discussion:

- The discussion is good; but the authors are advised to illustrate the real impact of their findings without repetition of results.

-Conclusion

- A real conclusion should focus on the question or claim you articulated in your study, whose resolution has been the main objective of your paper? That question now needs to be re-invoked and definitively answered. More still, you need to leave your reader with a higher level of insight into your topic

**********

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.]

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 PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Comparative study on the changes of bacterial species and severity of antimicrobial resistance during 13 years

PONE-D-21-10409R1

Dear Dr. Zhang,

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

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. 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 help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- 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.

Kind regards,

Abdelazeem Mohamed Algammal, Prof, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: