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.
Necessary revisions were made by the corresponding author in line with the reviewer's comments. The article is now ready for publication.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Anastazia Banaszak, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
Dear Dr. Artoni,
Thanks for your Submission. "Minor Revision" was decided in line with the reviewer's feedback. Please revise your publication by considering the reviewer's report. All the best.
When evaluated in general terms, the M&S have been written in clear and understandable English. In the article, relevant previous literature has been cited appropriately. It contains sufficient introduction and background. The structure of the article follows an acceptable 'standard chapters' format. Figures are relevant to the content of the article, have appropriate resolution, and are labeled correctly.
In the study, genetic analyses of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) D-loop were conducted
on four species (Steindachneridion scriptum (from the Tibagi and Uruguay Rivers), S. melanodermatum (from the Iguaçu River), S. doceanum (from the Doce River), and S. parahybae (from the Paraíba do Sul River). The topology was inferred using
Bayesian Inference (BI) and Maximum Likelihood (ML) phylogenetic reconstruction techniques. Sequences were also analyzed to assess genetic diversity levels. Methods described with sufficient detail information to replicate.
When evaluated in general terms, this M&S is stated how the research fills an identified knowledge gap. Careful investigation performed to a suitable technical and ethical standard.This research followed the international standards of animal experimentation, approved by the Ethics Committee for Animal Use of the Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (CEUA process number 0769342/2021). The collection was authorized by the Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA/ICMbio number 15115-1)
In conclusion, the study of genetic diversity within the genus Steindachneridion has revealed a wide range of variability between species, highlighted by different Molecular Operational Taxonomic Units (MOTUs).
The results are well expressed and provide supporting results related to the original research question.
I have no additional comments to the article.
English language needs review
Comments on the manuscript file
Comments on the manuscript file
Need English proofreading by a professional
suggest using more recent literature
its fine
has novelty
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.