Review History


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.

View examples of open peer review.

Summary

  • The initial submission of this article was received on March 31st, 2014 and was peer-reviewed by 2 reviewers and the Academic Editor.
  • The Academic Editor made their initial decision on April 21st, 2014.
  • The first revision was submitted on June 9th, 2014 and was reviewed by the Academic Editor.
  • The article was Accepted by the Academic Editor on June 9th, 2014.

Version 0.2 (accepted)

· Jun 9, 2014 · Academic Editor

Accept

I would like to thank you very much for the efforts you made to carefully address the reviewers' comments.

Version 0.1 (original submission)

· Apr 21, 2014 · Academic Editor

Minor Revisions

Please address minor points raised by the reviewer #1.

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

In Fig.2, label A is missing. The samples used in Fig.2A and Fig.2B should be consistent. And the orientations of the labels for x axes in Fig.2B and Fig.2D are better to be the same.

Experimental design

No comments.

Validity of the findings

In line 437, the authors found “shNRP-1 interacts with heparin much more weakly
than Fc NRP1 (this work) or the b1-b2 domains in isolation.” The authors should state how similar the shNRP-1 is to rNRP-1, so that the property of the human truncated variant shNRP-1 differs from that of Rat fusion Fc- rNRP-1 is mainly because of the conformation or integrity of the proteins, not because of the difference of the protein sequences.

Additional comments

It is very interesting result that the authors identified heparin binding sites of NRP-1 by selective labelling of lysines protected upon heparin binding. As the authors have mentioned, it would need further confirmation of the binding sites. Mutations of the proposed binding sites or truncation of MAM type c domain may verify the authors’ speculations in the future. And it would be nice if the authors could show the conserved protein sequence of the mapped heparin binding sites across the species.

Reviewer 2 ·

Basic reporting

No comment

Experimental design

No comment

Validity of the findings

No comment

Additional comments

Understanding the molecular basis for Nrp’s specific binding to multiple heparin binding sites will allow us to engineer Nrp modulators that can be designed with specificity for a particular ligand. The observations made in this paper advance the search for more selective inhibitors/activators of Nrp signaling.

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.