Taenia multiceps in Northern Tanzania: An Important but Preventable Disease Problem in Pastoral and Agropastoral Farming Systems
, Joram Buza 1, Gabriel Shirima 1, Felix Lankester 2,3, Jahashi Nzalawahe 4, Abdul-Hamid Lukambagire 4, Katharina Kreppel 1,5, Ellen Hughes 6, Kathryn J. Allan 6,7 and Sarah Cleaveland 6Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors describe a study conducted in several regions of Ghana with respect to the presence of T. multiceps in sheep and dogs in order to analyze the risk factos associated with their presence.
This is an interesting and valuable study that adds to the scientific literature but it needs to be written more clearly and better explained to be able to ensure that the readers understand all the hard work that was performed.
I am attaching the manuscript in PDF with my suggestions and here are some other comments:
In the introduction you should mention the economic impact of this disease on the animal industry. This reference should be added: Varcasia A, Tamponi C, Ahmed F, Cappai MG, Porcu F, Mehmood N, Dessì G, Scala A. Taenia multiceps coenurosis: a review. Parasit Vectors. 2022 Mar 12;15(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s13071-022-05210-0.
Please make sure that the material and methods are organized according to the results and that it is clear what technique was used to determine them. Also, tables need to be clear and correctly numbered. Figure 3 needs to be improved and Figure 2 can be removed.
The authors mention measuring the knowledge, attitude and practices on prevention of coenurosis in small ruminants and taeniid infection in dogs but I don´t think they used the appropriate methodology for this type of KAP studies.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you for the opportunity to review our manuscript. Attached are point by point responses and all other changes made can be easily in the main text of this manuscript in form of track changes.
Best,
Tito
On behalf of authors
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In the manuscript entitled “Taenia multiceps in northern Tanzania: An Important but Preventable Disease Problem in Pastoral and Agropastoral Farming Systems” the authors present the results from the study on prevalence of coenurosis in small ruminants and taeniid infection in dogs and identify risk factors for infection conducted in northern Tanzania. In my opinion the article is well written and provides important knowledge.
However, I have few issues for the authors which should be considered:
1. Introduction: could the authors add more information about how Taeniid tapeworms threaten the human?
2. M&M: the last paragraph on page 8- something is missing or just the end of the sentence? Please rebuild it.
3. Please include how many samples was examined in M&M
4. It’s a pity that no molecular study was performed here.
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you for time and efforts invested in reviewing our manuscript. We have responded to each point in a separate sheet and all changes made in the main text can be tracked.
Sincerely,
Tito
On behalf of authors
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have greatly improved the mansucript and despite some minor comments below, which should be addressed, it is accepted for publication.
Just a minor correction in lines 50 to 51: change "Human taeniid infection such as cerebral coenurosis (T. multiceps) occurs when ingest parasite eggs from contaminated environment, food, and water" to "Human teniid infection, such as cerebral coenurosis (T. multiceps), occurs with the ingestion of parasite eggs from contaminated environment, food, or water."
Re-check the numbering of tables, since there is no Table 2, the authors jump from Table 1 to Table 3.
Another minor correction in lines 295-296: "Such post-mortem (PM) was conducted by the qualified study veterinarian to determine presence or absence of the cyst in the brain", to "Such post-mortem (PM) evaluation was conducted by..."
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you to the reviewer for previous inputs which we agree have improved the manuscript and for these additional comments. Attached are point by point response for each comment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
