Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMay 23, 2021
Decision Letter - Juan J Loor, Editor

PONE-D-21-17024

Estradiol - induced immune suppression via prostaglandin E2 during parturition in bovine leukemia virus-infected cattle

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Konnai,

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 Jan 16 2022 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,

Juan J Loor

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. As part of your revision, please complete and submit a copy of the Full ARRIVE 2.0 Guidelines checklist, a document that aims to improve experimental reporting and reproducibility of animal studies for purposes of post-publication data analysis and reproducibility: https://arriveguidelines.org/sites/arrive/files/Author%20Checklist%20-%20Full.pdf (PDF). Please include your completed checklist as a Supporting Information file. Note that if your paper is accepted for publication, this checklist will be published as part of your article.

3. You indicated that you had ethical approval for your study. In your Methods section, please ensure you have also stated whether you obtained consent from owners of the cattle included in the study or whether the research ethics committee or IRB specifically waived the need for their consent.

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please delete it from any other section.

5. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

6. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[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: 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: This manuscript addresses a very important need for better definition of factors that impact immunosuppression in the peripartum period. The focus on PGE2 and estradiol is an important consideration and has yielded insight on specific receptor involvement.However, it is unclear if the focus is on at the time of parturition or the surrounding period?. The outcomes that determined specific conclusion on the selected term eg effect at parturition for the observed effects are not clear. More information on age, stage of lactation, parity, breed, diet and management etc would help uncover other possible contributing factors and should at least be discussed. Furthermore, the possible contribution of declining progesterone concentration (known immunosuppressant) and health parameters such status of infection by other pathogens, occurrence of diseases such as laminitis, mastitis etc. are not considered. In light of the impact of LPS on in vitro COX2 expression and PGE2 secretion what were the levels of endotoxins in reagents and containers for in vitro studies and what controls were used to evaluate the possible contribution of LPS? Discuss the use of the DMSO control versus buffer or known plasma. Please check sentence structure/missing words etc. eg line 2 and line 12.1, Not clear what this sentence means please edit Line 2 In dairy cattle, efficient milk production continues to require for pregnancy and 3 parturition each year.

**********

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: Yes: Mulumebet Worku

[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.

Revision 1

Answers to the comments of the Reviewer #1

Thank you very much for your comments. We appreciate your comments and amended our manuscript accordingly.

Answers to the comments are as follows:

Reviewer#1s' comments:

This manuscript addresses a very important need for better definition of factors that impact immunosuppression in the peripartum period. The focus on PGE2 and estradiol is an important consideration and has yielded insight on specific receptor involvement. However, it is unclear if the focus is on at the time of parturition or the surrounding period? The outcomes that determined specific conclusion on the selected term eg effect at parturition for the observed effects are not clear. More information on age, stage of lactation, parity, breed, diet and management etc would help uncover other possible contributing factors and should at least be discussed. Furthermore, the possible contribution of declining progesterone concentration (known immunosuppressant) and health parameters such status of infection by other pathogens, occurrence of diseases such as laminitis, mastitis etc. are not considered. In light of the impact of LPS on in vitro COX2 expression and PGE2 secretion what were the levels of endotoxins in reagents and containers for in vitro studies and what controls were used to evaluate the possible contribution of LPS? Discuss the use of the DMSO control versus buffer or known plasma. Please check sentence structure/missing words etc. eg line 2 and line 12.1, Not clear what this sentence means please edit Line 2 In dairy cattle, efficient milk production continues to require for pregnancy and 3 parturition each year.

1. ‘It is unclear if the focus is on at the time of parturition or the surrounding period?. The outcomes that determined specific conclusion on the selected term eg effect at parturition for the observed effects are not clear’

Ans: Immune suppression during pregnancy and parturition is regarded as a risk factor related to the progression of bovine chronic infections, such as bovine leukemia virus (BLV) infection. In our previous study, we demonstrated that prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) suppresses BLV-specific Th1 responses and contributes to the progression of BLV infection (Sajiki et al., J. Immunol., 2019, 203(5):1313-1324.). Thus, we focused on parturition because PGE2 and estradiol, which suppress immunity, are secreted by the placenta. This study was performed to investigate the involvement of estradiol-induced PGE2 in immune suppression during parturition. We believe that our study makes a significant contribution to the literature as a translational medical research because our data suggest that PGE2 upregulation inhibits Th1 responses during parturition. Additionally, estradiol was essential for PGE2 induction in pregnant cattle. Taken together, our data suggest that, in pregnant cattle, estradiol-induced PGE2 is involved in the suppression of Th1 responses, which contributes to the progression of bovine chronic infections.

2. ‘More information on age, stage of lactation, parity, breed, diet and management etc would help uncover other possible contributing factors and should at least be discussed’

Ans: As you pointed out, other factors such as lactation stage, parity, diet and management are also important issues as risk factors for developing leukemia. However, unfortunately, due to various restrictions, the information was not available. In this study, we focused only on parturition because PGE2 and estradiol, which suppress immunity, are secreted by the placenta, but we would like to consider other risk factors in the future. We would like to present it as a follow-up report.

3. ‘the possible contribution of declining progesterone concentration (known immunosuppressant) and health parameters such status of infection by other pathogens, occurrence of diseases such as laminitis, mastitis etc. are not considered’

Ans: Thank you very much for your interesting comments. This study does not show a causal relationship between the onset of the disease and other health parameters such as infection status by other pathogens or the occurrence of diseases such as laminitis and mastitis, but we believe this is something that we should also focus on. Actually, we are currently investigating these points for implementation, and this is one of our future studies. We would like to present it as a follow-up report.

4. ‘In light of the impact of LPS on in vitro COX2 expression and PGE2 secretion what were the levels of endotoxins in reagents and containers for in vitro studies and what controls were used to evaluate the possible contribution of LPS?’

Ans: As you pointed out, LPS is an important factor. To avoid the effects of LPS contamination, we used commercially available endotoxin (LPS)-free regents and containers for this experiment. Therefore, we did not perform any measurements.

5. ‘Discuss the use of the DMSO control versus buffer or known plasma’

Ans: PGE2 and estradiol are extremely insoluble in water. Therefore, DMSO is used as the best solvent. In this study, DMSO was used as the solvent as in our previous experiments. Since high concentrations of DMSO are cytotoxic, we used the same concentration of DMSO as a negative control.

6. ‘Please check sentence structure/missing words etc. eg line 2 and line 12.1, Not clear what this sentence means please edit Line 2 In dairy cattle, efficient milk production continues to require for pregnancy and 3 parturition each year’

Ans: Following your comment, we modified the sentence to ‘In dairy cattle, efficient milk production continues to require for pregnancy and 3 parturition each year’.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Juan J Loor, Editor

Estradiol - induced immune suppression via prostaglandin E2 during parturition in bovine leukemia virus-infected cattle

PONE-D-21-17024R1

Dear Dr. Konnai,

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,

Juan J Loor

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: Yes

**********

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: Thank you for your response. I would like to encourage follow up studies to uncover contributing factors for improved management decsions and translational applications.

**********

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: Mulumebet Worku

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Juan J Loor, Editor

PONE-D-21-17024R1

Estradiol-induced immune suppression via prostaglandin E2 during parturition in bovine leukemia virus-infected cattle

Dear Dr. Konnai:

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. Juan J Loor

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 .