Next Article in Journal
Human T-cell Leukemia Virus Type 1 and Strongyloides stercoralis: Partners in Pathogenesis
Next Article in Special Issue
Bovine Leukemia Virus Infection Affects Host Gene Expression Associated with DNA Mismatch Repair
Previous Article in Journal
Heterotrimeric G-Protein Signalers and RGSs in Aspergillus fumigatus
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effects of Naturally Occurring Mutations in Bovine Leukemia Virus 5′-LTR and Tax Gene on Viral Transcriptional Activity
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Quantitative Risk Assessment for the Introduction of Bovine Leukemia Virus-Infected Cattle Using a Cattle Movement Network Analysis

Pathogens 2020, 9(11), 903; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens9110903
by Kosuke Notsu 1, Anuwat Wiratsudakul 2,3, Shuya Mitoma 1, Hala El Daous 1,4, Chiho Kaneko 5, Heba M. El-Khaiat 4, Junzo Norimine 5,6 and Satoshi Sekiguchi 5,6,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Pathogens 2020, 9(11), 903; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens9110903
Submission received: 30 September 2020 / Revised: 27 October 2020 / Accepted: 27 October 2020 / Published: 28 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Collection Bovine Leukemia Virus Infection)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript aims to quantify the farm-level risk of BLV infection based on the translocation of cattle with and without BLV. Using public databases and several assumptions about the rate of BLV positivity in the population of cattle being studied. Following testing of nearly 1,000 animals, ~50% from 2 slaughterhouses and the remainder from farms and markets, it was found that 23.5% of samples were BLV positive. Review of cattle movement revealed that 87% of farms did not receive BLV positive animals. These data were used to create scenarios of cattle movement in order to predict the effect of BLV transmission from the introduction of a BLV-positive animal. The modeling of these scenarios is appreciated and may add to the field’s ability and interest in tracing BLV-positive cattle and the impact this has on farm-level economic considerations. However, the findings from the movement scenario analysis are not surprising, even with the large number of assumptions made and with aspects of in-farm transmission not being considered (line 190). It is suggested that more (anonymized) data that was initially collected from the farms and slaughter houses such as origin of sample, ELISA values, animal attributes such as sex, age, breed, weight be included as a supplementary table to allow readers to recapitulate these methods within different populations and to improve the overall impact of this study.      

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Please find comments in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

"Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop