All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
Thanks for addressing the minor revisions requested. Now your manuscript is accepted in PeerJ.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Konstantinos Kormas, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
Please be encouraged by the prompt reviews, and we look forward to your revised manuscript.
The manuscript by Rogers et al. aims to determine the differences in the microbiota's composition and diversity between night and day shifts and among workers with functional bowel symptoms.
The writing is clear and contains sufficient literature references. The figures, tables, and data provided seams sufficient to describe the study.
The study is based on the amplification of regions V3-V4 of the ribosomal gene 16S to characterize the microbial communities in the collected samples.
The general methods seem adequate for the study. However, the authors should clarify some details of the sample collection and analysis pipeline to support their conclusions (see comments in attached file).
The experimental design of the study seems adequate to reach the established objectives. However, the authors should clarify the sample collection and analysis pipeline details to support their observations and conclusions (see comments in attached file).
The manuscript by Rogers et al. aims to determine the differences in the microbiota's composition and diversity between night and day shifts and among workers with functional bowel symptoms. A relation that has not been previously established by previous literature.
It is a well-written manuscript with a good experimental design. However, a few minor issues with the data analysis should be addressed before accepting the manuscript for publication.
Language may have minor enhancements, some suggestions are provided in attached file
Littrature references are in aboundence, and cover the filed with good margin
The structure is good
Aim clearly stated, but should also be included in the Abstract
The research is within the scope of the journal
The ain is well defined and relevant
Intervention carried ouf with high quality technically and ethically
Methods description should include sttistical software used and level for statistical difference
The findings are of importance
All undrelying data have been provided
Conclusion is well stated, but should be specific about if a difference is statistically significant
Well discussed results
You have done a nice job with this study! I have marked some small issues where I suggest some change in the wording, or some more information added. Take a new language check before re-submitting.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.