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.
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your submission to PeerJ. Your MS in its current form can then be accepted.
Thank you for making the necessary arrangements.
Best regards Servet
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Anastazia Banaszak, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
Dear Author,
Thanks for your submission to PeerJ. "Minor Revision" was decided in line with the reviewer's feedback. Please revise your publication by considering the reviewer's report. All the best.
Servet
[# PeerJ Staff Note: PeerJ can provide language editing services if you wish - please contact us at [email protected] for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title). Your revision deadline is always extended while you undergo language editing. #]
The manuscript “A comparative evaluation of haematological and biochemical parameters of Nemipterus randalli and Pagellus erythrinus species living in Gökova Bay, Türkiye” is an interesting work which focuses on evaluating the differences in haematological and biochemical blood parameters in two species, the Randall’s threadfin bream and the Common pandora.
Aim of the work is to detect the physiological adaptations of both the forementioned species, which are respectively an autochthonous and an allochthonous and invasive one, to the specific environment of the Gokova Bay, in order to rule out the possibility of a potential wider distribution of the allochthonous species to other environments.
The manuscript is written in a generally good English and is easy to follow; the research appears to be thoroughly carried out, with interesting results.
The Introduction is complete and provides good bibliographical notes.
Materials and methods are well structured, and the specifics of the research are clearly explained.
Results are complete and widely explained as well.
The Discussion is broad and provides sufficient bibliography, giving a complete overall perspective on the matter.
The Conclusions are coherent with the findings of the research.
However, it is suggested to look up at some typos which are listed below.
In line 27, please correct “are significant increases” with “significantly increare”.
In line 62, correct “have reached” with “has reached”.
In line 71, “Russell, 1986” either needs parenthesis or has to be deleted.
In line 92, please correct with “which live in the same habitat and compete”.
In line 173, please delete “there is”.
In line 179, please change “a diverse” with “a broad”.
In line 198, please correct with “increase”.
In line 205, please add “to” adapt.
In line 216, please correct “was” with “were”.
In line 225, please correct “increased” with “an increase”.
In my opinion, the present work can be accepted for publishing after a minor revision.
The experimental design was well organized, the fish were sampled and treated correctly and the haematological analyses were performed with scientific rigor and with methods applicable to fish.
Climate change and its impact on aquatic organisms is an interesting aspect and represents a valuable contribution for investigations using bioindicators. However, a significant contribution is needed to identify reference values that are difficult to obtain in fish.
As the authors report, this is a preliminary study that requires further research. The interesting aspect of the study is the impact of the aquatic environment on the blood parameters of fish. Fish live in close contact with water and this determines important variations in blood parameters.
I have presented all my opinions in section 4.
I have presented all my opinions in section 4.
I have presented all my opinions in section 4.
In this study, the authors compared the hematological and biochemical parameters of two fish species, Nemipterus randalli and Pagellus erythrinus, from Gökova Bay, Türkiye. This study highlights the differences in blood parameters between these two species, especially significant changes in red blood cell counts, hemoglobin, and hematocrit levels during summer.
Both species showed higher red blood cell (RBC), hemoglobin (Hb), and hematocrit (Hct) values in summer compared to winter. This trend is understood as triggering increased metabolic activity and growth due to warmer water temperatures and greater nutrient availability.
In the comparative assessment of the two species, N. randalli showed consistently higher RBC, Hb, and Hct values in both summer and winter seasons, which indicates the species' physiological adaptations and different responses to environmental conditions.
The authors underlined that various factors such as temperature fluctuations, stress levels, and nutritional status significantly affect the hematological parameters of these fish species and the importance of the findings in monitoring these parameters to assess the health and ecological status of marine fish.
Overall, the study provides valuable information about the physiological differences between the two species and their adaptations to seasonal changes in their environment to achieve a healthy marine ecosystem.
As a result of all these evaluations, I consider the article acceptable for publication.
Title: accepted
Abstract:
may provide some of the haematological and biochemical profiles values
any reason of selected the specific months for sampling?
Introduction
overall is accepted. However, there are two concerns:
1. Perhaps separate into several paragraphs
2. too many old references indicating the study is not up to date
Materials and methods
any references to support method in the line 99, 106
accepted
the findings can be a basic information
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.