Inbox: fw: microbial drug resistance (133 of 1172)

Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:00:32 +0200 [08/14/08 08:00PM ICT] To:
Subject: Fw: Microbial Drug Resistance
Priority: 1
Part(s):
Headers:
Dear Dung, could you please reply to my email and answer the questions of reviewer n°2 mentioned in his/her minor comments: Materials and methods 1) Bacterial strains: Please give information on how representative the sample is for all the E. ictaluri isolates from the area during the study period. Were all cultured isolates included in the study or only a selection? Why were there so many isolates from the beginning of the study period and so few at the end of the period? 2) How many fish farms are there in the Mekong Delta and what proportion is represented in this study? Please send me your answers as soon as possible. Best regards, Freddy Haesebrouck ------------------------------------------------ Prof. dr. F. Haesebrouck, DVM, PhD, Dipl. ECPHM Laboratory of Veterinary Bacteriology and Mycology Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Ghent University Salisburylaan 133 B9820 Merelbeke - Belgium Tel 0032(0)9 264 7431 Fax 0032(0)9 264 7494 email: Chairman Research Commission Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Member of the Editorial Board of Veterinary Rese), Veterinary Microbiology, Veterinary Research Communications ------------------------------------------------ ----- Original Message ----- From: F. Haesebrouck To: Dung Cc: Prof. Dr. Annemie Decostere Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:27 PM Subject: Fw: Microbial Drug Resistance Dear Dung, your article most probably will be accepted for publication in MDR. Could you please answer the questions of reviewer n°2 mentioned in his/her minor comments and send me your answers as soon as possible. Best regards, Freddy Haesebrouck ----- Original Message ----- From: Alexander Tomasz To: Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:24 PM Subject: Microbial Drug Resistance MICROBIAL DRUG RESISTANCE August 12, 2008 MDR #848 Dr. Freddy Haesebrouck Department of Pathology, Bacteriology and Avian Diseases Ghent University Salisburylaan 133 9820 Merelbeke Belgium Dear Dr. Haesebrouck, Your manuscript entitled "Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Edwardsiella ictaluri isolates from natural outbreaks of bacillary necrosis of Pangasianodon hypothalamus in Vietnam" has been read by members of the editorial board. Enclosed I am sending a summary of the points of criticism. Please see if you can accommodate these and provide me with an appropriately revised manuscript, which I will then reconsider for publication. Along with the revised manuscript please also provide me with a point by point response to the refereal comments. Please send two copies of your revised manuscript (which should be on letter sized paper (8½" x 11") not on European A4 paper) back to me and write the word "revised" in the upper right hand corner of the title page. In addition, please submit the revised manuscript, all figures and tables on a CD-ROM . Sincerely, Alexander Tomasz, Ph.D. Editor phone: (212) 327-8277 fax: (212) 327-8688 Reviewer No 1: Mdr#848 This manuscript describes the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of isolates of the fish pathogen Edwardsiella ictaluri from Vietnam. The findings are of interest although the paper could be written in a much more straightforward fashion. At present, the meaning of multiple sentences is obscured by overly flowery and inexact language. Also, the references are often cited in random order. They should be in ascending numerical order. Finally, the large number of isolates resistant to streptomycin, oxytetracycline, and trimethoprim suggests that there is an epidemic clone present in this geographic area. Some attempt at strain typing would be highly recommended. Specific comments 1.) Page 2, line 12: It may be possible that the training is a testing artifact unless mutations in gyrA or other appropriate loci have been noted. 2.) Page 4, line 5: This sentence is a little difficult to understand. "For rendering treatment schemes effective" is unclear. Do the authors mean "for choosing effective antimicrobial agents"? Also, "to seize the unavoidable risk" perhaps means "to monitor for the unavoidable risk of antimicrobial resistance development". 3.) Page 8, line 20: According to the table, this should be >= 64 ug/ml not 128. 4.) Page 9, line 8: Usually the term "clinicians" refers to physicians and not veterinarians. The latter term would be more appropriate here. 5.) Page 10, line 15: The references should be listed in ascending numerical order. 6.) Page 12, line 19: EMEA should be spelled out the first time it is used. 7.) Page 13, line 20: The fact that 66% of isolates had the same antibiogram suggests that they may be clonal. The authors should mention this possibility in the Discussion. 8.) Page 14, line 14: The sentence containing the phrase "entrained several disadvantageous facts" is awkward and unclear "A process cannot entrain facts". Please clarify the meaning. 9.) Page 14, line 20: It is not clear how someone can "seize the risk of findings". Reviewer No 2: MDR 848 Dung TT, Haesebrouck F, Tuan NA,, et al. "Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Edwardsiella ictaluri isolates from natural outbreaks of bacillary necrosis of Pangasianodon hypothalmus in Vietnam" The aim of this study was to investigate the antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Edwardsiella ictaluri isolates from natural outbreaks of bacillary necrosis of the freshwater catfish Pangasianodon hypothalmus in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Sixty four isolates were collected from the years 2002-2005 and the MIC of 15 antimicrobial agents measured. The manuscript is clear and well written and the findings should be of interest to those working in the field of fish farming. Major comments Since the sample is relatively small (n=67), it is unfortunate that most of the isolates (37 or 55%) are from as long ago as 2002. The most recent isolates are from 2005 (n=3). As the authors point out (page 4), antimicrobial agents are widely used in Vietnamese aquaculture, both on a preventive and curative basis. It is therefore worth considering how relevant the results are today. Minor comments Abstract It would be important to include in the abstract information about how strains were selected and from what time period. Materials and methods 1) Bacterial strains: Please give information on how representative the sample is for all the E. ictaluri isolates from the area during the study period. Were all cultured isolates included in the study or only a selection? Why were there so many isolates from the beginning of the study period and so few at the end of the period? 2) How many fish farms are there in the Mekong Delta and what proportion is represented in this study?

Source: http://websrv1.ctu.edu.vn/guidelines/scientific/scientific/pdffiles/doc_nvhoa/acceptance/Accepted.pdf