Clonal Relationship within Two Oral Actinomyces Populations Collected from Plaque of Periodontitis Patients

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for researchers?

A: Good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Insufficient

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Good

Comments: The Discussion section, with the help of adequate relevant literature, investigates the clonal relationship within A. naeslundii and A. oris populations isolated from different depths of periodontal pockets in patients with chronic periodontitis. Unlike pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), DiversiLab, an automated repetitive sequence-based PCR bacterial typing system is less time-consuming and more convenient typing method which allows an easy comparison of different isolates. It focuses on investigating genetic relatedness of the strains isolated from different pocket depths, However, further research is required to examine the clonal properties when they are exposed to different environmental circumstances and different forms of therapy.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Very good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments: Words like “rely”, “generate”, “proportions” are misspelled in the text section of the manuscript.

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This study aims at assessing the clonal relationship within two oral Actinomyces populations (A. naeslundii and A. oris) collected from plaque of patients with chronic periodontitis. 223 strains were isolated from different depths of periodontal pockets from 20 chronic periodontitis patients. This study highlights the importance of DiversiLab, an automated repetitive sequence-based PCR bacterial typing system, which is less time-consuming and more convenient typing method, helps in investigating the heterogeneity of the individual strains. In this study, only A. naeslundii and A. oris are examined since they always occur in oral biofilms and periodontal pockets in high concentrations in almost all the patients. The findings suggest that identical clonal strains occur in subgingival shallow depths more often than in the other subgingival depths and supragingivally, the majority of the strains are found in the sites corresponding to the pockets of depths 5-6mm. As clones have the ability to adapt to different circumstances and therapies, further studies are required to investigate these properties.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team