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 April 3rd, 2014 and was peer-reviewed by 2 reviewers and the Academic Editor.
  • The Academic Editor made their initial decision on April 4th, 2014.
  • The first revision was submitted on August 4th, 2014 and was reviewed by the Academic Editor.
  • The article was Accepted by the Academic Editor on August 5th, 2014.

Version 0.2 (accepted)

· · Academic Editor

Accept

I read your revised manuscript. I recognize that you have appropriately revised the manuscript according to the reviewers' comments. Therefore, I have no more comments on your revised manuscript, which is accepted for publication in PeerJ.
Thank you very much for your submission to PeerJ.

Version 0.1 (original submission)

· · Academic Editor

Minor Revisions

Reviewer 1 recommends to accept your manuscript in the current form for publication in PeerJ, but Reviewer 2 recommends some revision before acceptance for publication of your manuscript in PeerJ.

I hope that you could revise your manuscript according to the Reviewer's comments by providing additional experimental results or some discussion resolving points raised by Reviewer 2.

Reviewer 1 ·

Basic reporting

Very good.

Experimental design

Excellence.

Validity of the findings

No problem.

Comments for the author

I think that it is a excellent article.

Reviewer 2 ·

Basic reporting

The authors demonstrated that all rice koji have the anti-obesity or anti-diabetes effects although the mechanisms may differ depending on the type of rice koji consumed. This study include an interesting finding, hover, they should revise it according to the following suggestions.

Experimental design

1) To clarify the effects of these extract on hepatic fatty acid synthesis, the authors should measure the expression of mRNA levels of ACD, acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase, CPT II, carnitine palmitoyl transferase II, ACC, acetyl-CoA carboxylase, ACL, ATP citrate lyase in addition to FAS, ACACbeta, and PPARalpha.
2) The authors should investigate the GLUT4 expression on muscle of in vivo model, and should investigate the effect of these extracts on the expression of GLUT4.

Validity of the findings

The authors should carefully evaluate the effects of extracts on myotube cells, and also should confirm these findings using samples from in vivo model.

Comments for the author

They should revise it according to the following suggestions.

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.