Review History


To increase transparency, PeerJ operates a system of 'optional signed reviews and history'. This takes two forms: (1) peer reviewers are encouraged, but not required, to provide their names (if they do so, then their profile page records the articles they have reviewed), and (2) authors are given the option of reproducing their entire peer review history alongside their published article (in which case the complete peer review process is provided, including revisions, rebuttal letters and editor decision letters).

New to public reviews? Learn more about optional signed reviews and how to write a better rebuttal letter.

Summary

  • The initial submission of this article was received on February 3rd, 2016 and was peer-reviewed by 2 reviewers and the Academic Editor.
  • The Academic Editor made their initial decision on February 23rd, 2016.
  • The first revision was submitted on March 2nd, 2016 and was reviewed by the Academic Editor.
  • The article was Accepted by the Academic Editor on March 2nd, 2016.

Version 0.2 (accepted)

· · Academic Editor

Accept

I have gone over the revision, and you have answered the few minor comments well. Therefore, my decision is "Accept". At the same time, I have gone over your manuscript and found many small English corrections; please ensure these are done in the proof stage if not earlier. Please take a look at the attached pdf file and incorporate when you get your author proof.

Version 0.1 (original submission)

· · Academic Editor

Minor Revisions

Both reviewers had only very minor comments, primarily related to figures and tables, and I have no additional comments. Therefore, my decision is "minor revision".

·

Basic reporting

The present manuscript brings us important information about some gastropods population, non only on its genetic variation, but also with some inferences about the migration of these species of snails through the Caribbean region.

Experimental design

The experimental design was carefully prepared and followed with a precious attention to all details, many important and crucial to the molecular biology studies.

Validity of the findings

The findings here presented are very important to show us the great diversity of snails species and the wide intra specific variation found in this group of animals. As well as, giving us some idea about the migration occurred turning these species an invading one in sonme countries. So, beyond this, the results may serve as a base to studies on host parasite relationships, once the snails from Bulimulus genus may be used as intermediate host for some larval helminths, allowing us understand the spreading of some diseases as that caused by Angiostrongylus cantonensis and other.

Comments for the author

The manuscript is valuable and well conducted, The authors should correct the possition of legends and include scale bars to the sanils' figures and maps to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 ·

Basic reporting

No Comments.

Experimental design

No Comments.

Validity of the findings

No Comments.

Comments for the author

A useful contribution providing additional sequence data on a difficult group of molluscs. One very minor comment, the caption accompanying Table 2 should make clear reference to the where the information on the codes for each "Putative species" can be found (or better still, list out the binomials).

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.