Peer Review History

Original SubmissionDecember 21, 2021
Decision Letter - David M. Ojcius, Editor

PONE-D-21-40151Butyrate modulates mucin secretion and bacterial adherence in LoVo cells via MAPK signalingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hwang,

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. In particular, a reviewer recommends more information on experimental procedures.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 01 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: https://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,

David M. Ojcius

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: 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: 1. Page 6, Line 115-125, ELISA kit to measure mucin section: what type of mucin does this kit target? What type of antibody is used in the kit? What is Reagent A and Reagent B?

2. Page6, Line 132, please specify “primary antibody”. Line 133, what type of secondary antibody used here? Please specify.

3. The authors did not clearly specify the mucin they measured is mucins stored in the cells or the mucins that were released (secreted) outside the cell. In another word, is butyrate able to increase mucin synthesis or secretion, or synthesis and secretion? The protocols provided in the manuscript seems not clear about this.

4. Does butyrate change the mucin types synthesize by the cells? Many types of mucins are produced by GI epithelial cells, they have different functions and properties.

**********

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.

Revision 1

Thank you for your review.

Our researchers did their best to make modifications based on the reviewers' responses.

1. Page 6, Line 115-125, ELISA kit to measure mucin section: what type of mucin does this kit target? What type of antibody is used in the kit? What is Reagent A and Reagent B?

The contents of the ELISA kit were added to the manuscript (page 6, line 116-124)

2. Page6, Line 132, please specify “primary antibody”. Line 133, what type of secondary antibody used here? Please specify.

- Type of the antibodies was mentioned in the manuscript (page 6, line 134-135).

3. The authors did not clearly specify the mucin they measured is mucins stored in the cells or the mucins that were released (secreted) outside the cell. In another word, is butyrate able to increase mucin synthesis or secretion, or synthesis and secretion? The protocols provided in the manuscript seems not clear about this.

- We were measured to the mucins stored in the cells (page 6, line 114)

4. Does butyrate change the mucin types synthesize by the cells? Many types of mucins are produced by GI epithelial cells, they have different functions and properties.

- There were reports that butyrate stimulates the synthesis or secretion of mucin in the colon cell lines. However, the mechanism by which intestinal epithelial cells increase mucin synthesis or secretion by butyrate treatment needs to be further studied. (page 13, 265-267).

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - David M. Ojcius, Editor

PONE-D-21-40151R1Butyrate modulates mucin secretion and bacterial adherence in LoVo cells via MAPK signalingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hwang,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it still does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a newly revised version of the manuscript that addresses the concerns of the reviewer.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 25 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: https://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,

David M. Ojcius

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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

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: (No Response)

**********

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: No

**********

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: The authors did not respond or address the questions raised in the previous review. What type of mucin was measured in this study, MUC 1, 2, MUC5AC or MUC6? The issue of mixing mucin synthesis and release (secretion) is not resolved in the revision.

**********

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

[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 2

Response to reviewers

Thank you for your review.

Our researchers did their best to make modifications based on the reviewers' responses.

1. Page 6, Line 115-125, ELISA kit to measure mucin section: what type of mucin does this kit target? What type of antibody is used in the kit? What is Reagent A and Reagent B?

The contents of the ELISA kit were added to the manuscript (page 6, line 115-125)

2. Page6, Line 132, please specify “primary antibody”. Line 133, what type of secondary antibody used here? Please specify.

- Type of the antibodies was mentioned in the manuscript (page 6, line 133-134).

3. The authors did not clearly specify the mucin they measured is mucins stored in the cells or the mucins that were released (secreted) outside the cell. In another word, is butyrate able to increase mucin synthesis or secretion, or synthesis and secretion? The protocols provided in the manuscript seems not clear about this.

- We were measured to the measure mucin 2 secreted by the cells. (page 5-6, line 113-114)

4. Does butyrate change the mucin types synthesize by the cells? Many types of mucins are produced by GI epithelial cells, they have different functions and properties.

- There were reports that butyrate stimulates the synthesis or secretion of mucin in the colon cell lines. However, the mechanism by which intestinal epithelial cells increase mucin synthesis or secretion by butyrate treatment needs to be further studied. (page 13, 265-267).

5. The authors did not respond or address the questions raised in the previous review. What type of mucin was measured in this study, MUC 1, 2, MUC5AC or MUC6? The issue of mixing mucin synthesis and release (secretion) is not resolved in the revision.

- The type of mucin measured in this study is MUC2 secreted by the LoVo cell (page 5-6, line 113-114).

- Although the underlying molecular mechanism of increased mucin secretion by butyrate treatment remains to be determined, the results in the present study indicate that the butyrate treatment may increase mucin secretion in the LoVo cell.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - David M. Ojcius, Editor

PONE-D-21-40151R2Butyrate modulates mucin secretion and bacterial adherence in LoVo cells via MAPK signalingPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hwang,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it still 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. In particular, the reviewer considers that previous concerns were not addressed.

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 29 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: https://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,

David M. Ojcius

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

The authors did not respond or address the questions raised in the previous review. What type of mucin was measured in this study, MUC 1, 2, MUC5AC or MUC6? The issue of mixing mucin synthesis and release (secretion) is not resolved in the revision.

The authors did not provide any information I requested, such as what is the antibody target? MUC2, MUC5AC, MUC6, MUC7, MUC8, MUC9, MUC20. The issue about mixing up the synthesis and secretion (release) is not resolved in the revised manuscript.

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

[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 3

Response to reviewers

Dear reviewers and editorial staffs in PLOS ONE

We are sincerely grateful for your thorough consideration and scrutiny of our manuscript, “Butyrate modulates mucin secretion and bacterial adherence in LoVo cells via MAPK signaling”, manuscript number PONE-D-21-40151R2. Through the accurate comments made by the reviewer, we better understand the critical issues in this paper. We have revised the manuscript according to the Reviewer’s suggestions. We hope that our revised manuscript will be considered and accepted for publication in the PLOS ONE. We acknowledge that the scientific and clinical quality of our manuscript was improved by the scrutinizing efforts of the reviewers and editors. Our researchers did their best to make modifications based on the reviewers' responses and point-by-point responses to the reviewer’ comments are provided below.

Reviewer

1) Reviewer’s comment: (Page 6, Line 115-125) ELISA kit to measure mucin section: what type of mucin does this kit target? What type of antibody is used in the kit? What is Reagent A and Reagent B?

Author’s response: The ELISA kit used in the study targets mucin2. The antibodies used in the kit are capture antibody and biotin-conjugated detection antibody specific to mucin2. The protocol of the ELISA kit included information of reagent A and B were revised in the manuscript (page 6, line 115-130).

2) Reviewer’s comment: (Page6, Line 132) please specify “primary antibody”. Line 133, what type of secondary antibody used here? Please specify.

Author’s response: Primary antibody and a biotinylated secondary andibody used specific to mucin2 (page 6, line 136-137).

3) Reviewer’s comment: The authors did not clearly specify the mucin they measured is mucins stored in the cells or the mucins that were released (secreted) outside the cell. In another word, is butyrate able to increase mucin synthesis or secretion, or synthesis and secretion? The protocols provided in the manuscript seems not clear about this.

Author’s response: We measured the mucin2 that secreted outside the LoVo cells to investigate stimulated by the butyrate treatment in the LoVo cells. We found that in this study, butyrate addition can stimulate the secretion of mucin in LoVo cell, and the protocol has been modified more clearly (page 6, line 115-121).

4) Reviewer’s comment: Does butyrate change the mucin types synthesize by the cells? Many types of mucins are produced by GI epithelial cells, they have different functions and properties.

Author’s response: We think that butyrate may increase mucin produced by cells. However, I would appreciate your understanding that this present study has a limitation of not investigating all types of mucins that can increase in the cell by the butyrate treatment.

Although the underlying molecular mechanism of increased mucin secretion by butyrate treatment remains to be determined, the results of this present study indicate that butyrate may stimulate secretion of mucin in the LoVo cells. Other papers have been also reported that butyrate stimulates the secretion of mucin in the colon cell lines (page 13, line 265-273).

5) Reviewer’s comment: The authors did not provide any information I requested, such as what is the antibody target? MUC2, MUC5AC, MUC6, MUC7, MUC8, MUC9, MUC20. The issue about mixing up the synthesis and secretion (release) is not resolved in the revised manuscript.

Author’s response: In this study, ELISA kit and immunohistochemical staining kit were used to measure MUC2, and the antibodies also used target for MUC2. More detailed protocols have been modified in the manuscript (page 6, line 115-124; page 6-7, line 136-138)

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of butyrate on mucin released from Lovo cells, and we focused on measuring mucin released from butyrate-treated LoVo cells. We expression for synthesis was deleted and the protocol was more clearly modified so that the secretion and synthesis were not confused in the manuscript (page 6, line 115-121; page 10, line 210-213; page 271-273)

I would appreciate your understanding if there is anything insufficient about the author's response and please give us more detailed comments.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - David M. Ojcius, Editor

Butyrate modulates mucin secretion and bacterial adherence in LoVo cells via MAPK signaling

PONE-D-21-40151R3

Dear Dr. Hwang,

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,

David M. Ojcius

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: (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: No

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - David M. Ojcius, Editor

PONE-D-21-40151R3

Butyrate modulates mucin secretion and bacterial adherence in LoVo cells via MAPK signaling

Dear Dr. Hwang:

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. David M. Ojcius

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 .