Effects of L-valine in layer diets containing 0.72% isoleucine

Usman Liaqat; Yasir Ditta; Saima Naveed; Annie King; Talat Pasha; Sana Ullah; Khalid Abdul Majeed

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0258250

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionNovember 20, 2020
12 Jan 2021 Decision Letter - Mahmoud A.O. Dawood, Editor PONE-D-20-36625 Effect of L-valine in layer diets containing 0.72% isoleucine PLOS ONE Dear Dr. King, 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. Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 26 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 We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Mahmoud A.O. Dawood, PhD 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 2.We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts: a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide. 3. Please amend either the title on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the title in the manuscript so that they are identical. 4. Please amend your authorship list in your manuscript file to include author Khalid Majeed. 5. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "This research was supported by EVONIK Animal Nutrition, Singapore." 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 funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." Additionally, because some of your funding information pertains to commercial funding, we ask you to provide an updated Competing Interests statement, declaring all sources of commercial funding. In your Competing Interests statement, please confirm that your commercial funding does not alter your adherence to PLOS ONE Editorial policies and criteria 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 this statement is not true and your adherence to PLOS policies on sharing data and materials is altered, please explain how. Please include the updated Competing Interests Statement and Funding Statement in 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: Yes Reviewer #2: Partly ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: No ****** 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: 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: Dear Authors Regarding the manuscript title Effect of L-valine in layer diets containing 0.72% isoleucine The scientific background of the topic was well mentioned in the introduction part. The experiment design, as well as the replicates and methods used, were very good. The results obtained were presented in tables well discussed with other author’s results. However, some observation in the present paper should be corrected and add to improve the quality of the paper. Introduction 1- Need more information about the effects of isoleucine in layer hens. 2- Need recently references for using Valine in layer diets Discussion 3- 3- In this part you focused on the studies which agree or disagree with your results without a)ny explanation why these findings were agree with disagree with you. 4- You must write the mode of action of L-valine and isoleucine on layer performance and egg quality 5- I advise to use some recently reference for using amino acids in poultry and the additives affect the egg quality and immunity I recommend reading and using the following references: Saleh A. A. (2016) Effect of Low-Protein in Iso-Energetic Diets on Performance, Carcass Characteristics, Digestibilities and Plasma Lipids of Broiler Chickens. Egyptian Poultry Science Journal. Vol (36) (I): (251-262). Saleh A. A, Mohammed S. Eltantawy , Esraa M. Gawish , Hassan H. Younis , Khairy A. Amber , Abd El-Moneim E. Abd El-Moneim & Tarek A. Ebeid (2020) Impact of Dietary Organic Mineral Supplementation on Reproductive Performance, Egg Quality Characteristics, Lipid Oxidation, Ovarian Follicular Development, and Immune Response in Laying Hens Under High Ambient Temperature. Biological Trace Element Research. 195:506–514. Saleh, AA., Ashia Zaki, Ahmed El- Awady, Khairy Amber, Neamat Badwi, Yahya Eid, Tarek A. Ebeid (2020) Effect of substituting wheat bran with cumin seed meal on laying performance, egg quality characteristics and fatty acid profile in laying hens. Veterinarski Arhiv 90 (1), 47-56, Saleh A. A., Abeer A. Kirrella, Mahmoud A. O. Dawood, Tarek A. Ebeid (2019) Effect of dietary inclusion of cumin seed oil on the performance, egg quality, immune response and ovarian development in laying hens under high ambient temperature. Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition. 103(6):1810-1817. 6- Material and Methods Why didn’t you prepare your diets according the layer strain catalog (LSL-LITE)? P13 L1 Mash and fresh water were provided ad libitum, what is mean of mash are you mean feed form? Table 5. Feed and nutrient composition of diets. You must provide the crude protein levels of (Canola Meal, Sunflower seed meal, Soybean Meal and Poultry By-Product Meal Reviewer #2: This is the review for the manuscript PONE-D-20-35025, entitled “L-valine in diets with 0.72% isoleucine: effect on production, egg quality, serum biochemistry, and ileal digestibility of protein” for PLOS ONE Journal. The manuscript aims at investigating the effect of dietary supplementation of L-valine on laying hen performance in terms of egg production and quality, serum biochemistry, and protein ileal digestibility. I have the following more detailed comments that can help authors in the revision of the manuscript: Page 4 (Table 1): Kindly check body weight values for laying hens. It seems not correct. These values more appropriate for egg weight not hen body weight. Page 8 (Line 5): delete this sentence Page 10 (Line 16): The effect of valine: lysine on egg production is not discussed. The authors only compared with the findings in the previous studies and nothing mentioned why this alteration has occurred. Page 12 (Material and methods) Page 12 (Line 19): 490 refers to what? Kindly write (N=490). Kindly provide the average initial hen weight. Nothing mentioned about blood or serum collection or analysis, and ileal digestibility, egg quality assessment. Kindly check the superscripts according to the pooled SE and presented values of mean through the whole manuscript ****** 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.] 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. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258250.r001
Revision 1
10 Sep 2021 Author Response [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 Reviewer #2: Partly More information was provided throughout the manuscript to improve it. ________________________________________ 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: No Reviewer 2 did not provide information on where the analysis was weak. We conducted regression analysis on each measurement to determine all responses as discussed in the manuscript. 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 Data will be deposited at the UC Davis Library, University of California, Davis, CA 95616. ________________________________________ 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: No No specific errors were noted. ________________________________________ 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: Dear Authors Regarding the manuscript title Effect of L-valine in layer diets containing 0.72% isoleucine The scientific background of the topic was well mentioned in the introduction part. The experiment design, as well as the replicates and methods used, were very good. The results obtained were presented in tables well discussed with other author’s results. However, some observation in the present paper should be corrected and add to improve the quality of the paper. More information has been added to all parts of the manuscript. In many places, it was totally rewritten. Introduction 1- Need more information about the effects of isoleucine in layer hens. 2- Need recently references for using Valine in layer diets More information was added to the Introduction. Discussion 3- 3- In this part you focused on the studies which agree or disagree with your results without a)ny explanation why these findings were agree with disagree with you. More discussion was added as advised. 4- You must write the mode of action of L-valine and isoleucine on layer performance and egg quality. More discussion was added in the Introduction and Results and Discussion. 5- I advise to use some recently reference for using amino acids in poultry and the additives affect the egg quality and immunity I recommend reading and using the following references: Saleh A. A. (2016) Effect of Low-Protein in Iso-Energetic Diets on Performance, Carcass Characteristics, Digestibilities and Plasma Lipids of Broiler Chickens. Egyptian Poultry Science Journal. Vol (36) (I): (251-262). Saleh A. A, Mohammed S. Eltantawy , Esraa M. Gawish , Hassan H. Younis , Khairy A. Amber , Abd El-Moneim E. Abd El-Moneim & Tarek A. Ebeid (2020) Impact of Dietary Organic Mineral Supplementation on Reproductive Performance, Egg Quality Characteristics, Lipid Oxidation, Ovarian Follicular Development, and Immune Response in Laying Hens Under High Ambient Temperature. Biological Trace Element Research. 195:506–514. Saleh, AA., Ashia Zaki, Ahmed El- Awady, Khairy Amber, Neamat Badwi, Yahya Eid, Tarek A. Ebeid (2020) Effect of substituting wheat bran with cumin seed meal on laying performance, egg quality characteristics and fatty acid profile in laying hens. Veterinarski Arhiv 90 (1), 47-56, Saleh A. A., Abeer A. Kirrella, Mahmoud A. O. Dawood, Tarek A. Ebeid (2019) Effect of dietary inclusion of cumin seed oil on the performance, egg quality, immune response and ovarian development in laying hens under high ambient temperature. Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition. 103(6):1810-1817. Many of these papers had to be requested from the authors or there was a monetary fee attached to them. The authors thank the Reviewer for the comment and found other useful articles. 6- Material and Methods Why didn’t you prepare your diets according the layer strain catalog (LSL-LITE)? In Material and Methods, we explained that other available and less expensive sources of protein were used to replace soy. We provided an evaluation of protein (and references) for the sources. It is not reasonable to assume that all researchers throughout the world can use the exact same diets used by the producers of the layers. P13 L1 Mash and fresh water were provided ad libitum, what is mean of mash are you mean feed form? We have explained that "mash" was the form of the diet. This has not been an issue with other manuscripts. Table 5. Feed and nutrient composition of diets. You must provide the crude protein levels of (Canola Meal, Sunflower seed meal, Soybean Meal and Poultry By-Product Meal These were provided in Table 5 (Materials and Methods). Reviewer #2: This is the review for the manuscript PONE-D-20-35025, entitled “L-valine in diets with 0.72% isoleucine: effect on production, egg quality, serum biochemistry, and ileal digestibility of protein” for PLOS ONE Journal. The manuscript aims at investigating the effect of dietary supplementation of L-valine on laying hen performance in terms of egg production and quality, serum biochemistry, and protein ileal digestibility. I have the following more detailed comments that can help authors in the revision of the manuscript: We thank Reviewer # 2 for the comments. Page 4 (Table 1): Kindly check body weight values for laying hens. It seems not correct. These values more appropriate for egg weight not hen body weight. The information was removed. Page 8 (Line 5): delete this sentence It was deleted. Page 10 (Line 16): The effect of valine: lysine on egg production is not discussed. The authors only compared with the findings in the previous studies and nothing mentioned why this alteration has occurred. More information was added. Page 12 (Material and methods) Page 12 (Line 19): 490 refers to what? Kindly write (N=490). Kindly provide the average initial hen weight. Please see Material and Methods - Diets, Housing and Care. Nothing mentioned about blood or serum collection or analysis, and ileal digestibility, egg quality assessment. This information is included in the first paper on isoleucine. We are also submitting revisions for this work, “Varying digestible isoleucine level to determine effects on performance, egg quality, serum biochemistry, and ileal protein digestibility in diets of young laying hens” and hope to have it be approved for publication and published before this present manuscript. Revisions for the manuscript on work with isoleucine should have been completed first; however, communication between colleagues in Pakistan and the US was delayed for some time. _________ Kindly check the superscripts according to the pooled SE and presented values of mean through the whole manuscript. These have been added throughout the Results and Discussion. ________________________________________ 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. Yes. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Valin review and comments 8 18 21.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258250.r002
23 Sep 2021 Decision Letter - Mahmoud A.O. Dawood, Editor Effects of L-valine in layer diets containing 0.72% isoleucine PONE-D-20-36625R1 Dear Dr. King, 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, Mahmoud A.O. Dawood, PhD Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258250.r003
Formally Accepted
9 Dec 2021 Acceptance Letter - Mahmoud A.O. Dawood, Editor PONE-D-20-36625R1 Effects of L-valine in layer diets containing 0.72% isoleucine Dear Dr. King: I'm 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 let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, 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. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Mahmoud A.O. Dawood Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258250.r004

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 .