Diversity and Evolution of Clostridium beijerinckii and Complete Genome of the Type Strain DSM 791^T

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Diversity and evolution of Clostridium beijerinckii and com- 2 plete genome of the type strain DSM 791T Authors sequenced and assembled the complete genome of the type strain C. beijerinckii DSM 791T and used it for a comparison to other, almost 250, strains. The experimental work is done well, however, the manuscript needs a significant revision to be reconsidered for publication. Therefore, in my point of view, the manuscript could be considered for acceptance but not in its current form. Having said that following revisions are suggested; Comments: The abstract is short. Normally an abstract should state briefly the purpose of the study undertaken and meaningful conclusions based on the obtained results. Hence, this needs rewriting. I would expect brief, yet concise, the quantitative data description of the results in the abstract. The given list of keywords is superficial with broader terms. More specific terms should be used. Replace accordingly. Avoid the use of acronyms in abstract. The introduction is short. More literature should be added with recent and relevant literature. Introduction section needs to be elaborated, in particular, the authors should highlight the novelty of this work, and illustrate the superiority of this work from previous reports, since lots of related reports have been appeared in the scientific literature. In addition, what are the gaps in this regards. The manuscript should be carefully revised so that the results are better discussed. In my opinion, authors mainly focused on results and the Discussion section lacks scientific depth. All sections should be critically discussed and compared with the previous reports. This will actually strengthen the manuscript and will highlight the significance of the work. In conclusion, I would like to see the major findings and how they are addressing the left behind research gaps and covering current challenges. The level of English used is not up to the journal standard. Throughout the manuscript, the level of English used is not up to the standard of the journal. The Latin names and Greek letters should be presented in italic in the whole manuscript, the unit presentation should be unified in the whole manuscript, abbreviations presentation should be unified.

Author Response

Thank you for your extensive review. The whole manuscript was proofread by a native speaker to improve readability. The abstract was rewritten to contain the quantitative data description. The abstract is now of the maximum length available as according to the journal policy, the maximum length of an abstract is 200 words (we have 199 now). No acronyms were used in the abstract, so we are not sure about this suggestion. We also believe that keywords are focused enough and appropriately supplement the title.

The introduction section was extended and more references were added. The manuscript cites 78 papers now, which should be a sufficient amount as we would like to keep our manuscript rather concise and focused. We tried to better highlight benefits of our study.

We also extended and rewrote discussion and conclusions sections. Nevertheless, we really want to keep our manuscript to be short and mainly results oriented.

As the manuscript was proofread and a number of changes was made, also abbreviations’ presentation was unified. We are not about other suggestions as the manuscript contains no Greek letters and all Latin names are written in italic (please note that words “clostridia”, “clostridial”, etc. are not Latin names).

Reviewer 2 Report

The work is very interesting and done systematically. The manuscript is written well. The paper can be accepted for publication.

 

Author Response

Thank you for your positive review.

Reviewer 3 Report

The study describes the assembly and analysis of the Clostridium beijerinckii type strain DSM791 genome, providing a necessary reference genome against which genomes of other C. beijerinckii isolates can be mapped, assembled and analysed. The authors carry out this analysis for 237 readily available Clostridium genomes and subsequently identify the provisional core and accessory genomes for this species.  The figures are of high quality, and the methods and results are sound.  However, the manuscript is in need of reworking by a native English speaker to improve the readability and to remove some instances of ambiguity due to language problems.  

Author Response

Thank you for your positive review. The whole manuscript was proofread by a native speaker to improve readability. Moreover, the introduction section was slightly extended and more references were added.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The revised version reads well. Authors have addressed all the comments raised in the last review. This manuscript can now be accepted for publication.