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.
Both reviewers were happy with your revised version.
# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Valeria Souza, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #
no comment
no comment
no comment
I am happy with the revision authors have made. It is an excellent paper and worthy of publication in PeerJ.
no comment
no comment
no comment
The revised MS is OK for publication in PeerJ.
As you can see, your paper was considered important and useful by both reviewers. Each of them, however, raised specific criticisms and made remarks that you should take into account when submitting a revised version. Please, indicate clearly in your rebuttal what has been changed (or not changed) as per the reviewers' comments.
no comment
no comment
no comment
Comments for the author:
This is an interesting study done by Shang and coworkers. Authors have done extensive work to understand the resistance in Elizabethkingia spp against ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin drugs. 131 Elizabethkingia spp isolates were used in this study. Authors have done extensive molecular biology, microbiology to identify the bacterial strains, mutations, and calculated the MIC values. They have also found that most of the mutations are detected in GyrA gene which is responsible for the drug resistance. The conclusions of the study are well stated and linked to the original research question. This study will be highly appreciated by mechanistic researcher who are trying to understand the drug resistance mechanism in Elizabethkingia spp against ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin. The study has been carried out with great care and caution, however, two small issues demand attention by the authors.
1. The last word of the title of the paper should be “species”
2. The font size of the Figure labels is small. Please increase the font size for the better visibility.
Clear and unambiguous; and professional English used throughout in the manuscript. I would recommend this important piece of work for the publication in PeerJ, after raised issues are taken care.
no comment
no comment
no comment
The article entitled "Molecular typing and profiling of topoisomerase mutations causing resistance to ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin in Elizabethkingia species", determined fluoroquinolone susceptibility profiles of clinical Elizabethkingi. These results provide information for further research on the variations of the resistance mechanism and potential clinical guidance for infection management. I recommend it for publication in PeerJ, but there are some parts to be improved and revised before acceptance:
>The quality of Fig1 is poor, please update this figure so that the readers can clearly understand it.
>Please label any significance analysis’s value on the figure(s).
>All figure’s legend must be described in detail.
>Fig2 (A, B, C) must be merged into one page.
>Fig3 (A, B, C) must be merged into one page.
>The authors should give the corresponding information about use of the sequences and how to construct the phylogenetic tree in Fig3.
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.