Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Comparative experimental investigation on the effic acy of mono - and multiprobiotic 
strains  in non -alcoholic fatty liver disease prevention  
 
Version: 0 Date: 16 Nov 2015  
 
Reviewer: Mary Anne Amalaradjou  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This study investigates  the protective effect of monostrain and multistrain probiotics on NAFLD.  
 
Major comment:  
The authors have compared the efficacy of lyophilized Vs live probiotic cultures. However, the 
cultures used in this study specifically for group Vi and VII are totally different. Hence 
comparing these two groups and basing their conclusion on this experim ental approach would 
not be valid. Since it is well known and established that probiotic mediated protective effects are 
highly strain specific, unless the authors use the same exact strains in group VI and VII, the 
results of the study would not be valid.  Hence the authors would also need to change the 
manuscript title accordingly. The authors could consider resubmitting the manuscript just 
investigating the effect of mono Vs poly probiotic strains of the lyophilized cultures.  
 
Minor comments  
- It would be  helpful if the authors could explain the use of MSG in the study and the 
MSG -obesity group? Is MSG the standard drug of choice to induce NAFLD in rats?  
 
 
- Inclusion of photographs from the histopathological sections for the different treatments 
would also benefit the manuscript  
 
- Results section, please make sure the correct fig and tables are mentioned in the text  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing in terests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in t he future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to th e content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do y ou have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  
If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
'I declare that I have no  competing interests'  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
 
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Comparative experimental investigation on the effic acy of mono - and multiprobiotic 
strains  in non -alcoholic fatty liver disease prevention  
 
Version: 0 Date: 16 Nov 2015  
 
Reviewer: Mary Anne Amalaradjou  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This study investigates  the protective effect of monostrain and multistrain probiotics on NAFLD.  
 
Major comment:  
The authors have compared the efficacy of lyophilized Vs live probiotic cultures. However, the 
cultures used in this study specifically for group Vi and VII are totally different. Hence 
comparing these two groups and basing their conclusion on this experim ental approach would 
not be valid. Since it is well known and established that probiotic mediated protective effects are 
highly strain specific, unless the authors use the same exact strains in group VI and VII, the 
results of the study would not be valid.  Hence the authors would also need to change the 
manuscript title accordingly. The authors could consider resubmitting the manuscript just 
investigating the effect of mono Vs poly probiotic strains of the lyophilized cultures.  
 
Minor comments  
- It would be  helpful if the authors could explain the use of MSG in the study and the 
MSG -obesity group? Is MSG the standard drug of choice to induce NAFLD in rats?  
 
 
- Inclusion of photographs from the histopathological sections for the different treatments 
would also benefit the manuscript  
 
- Results section, please make sure the correct fig and tables are mentioned in the text  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing in terests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in t he future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to th e content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do y ou have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  
If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
'I declare that I have no  competing interests'  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Comparative experimental investigation on the effic acy of mono - and multiprobiotic 
strains  in non -alcoholic fatty liver disease prevention  
 
Version: 0 Date: 16 Nov 2015  
 
Reviewer: Mary Anne Amalaradjou  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This study investigates  the protective effect of monostrain and multistrain probiotics on NAFLD.  
 
Major comment:  
The authors have compared the efficacy of lyophilized Vs live probiotic cultures. However, the 
cultures used in this study specifically for group Vi and VII are totally different. Hence 
comparing these two groups and basing their conclusion on this experim ental approach would 
not be valid. Since it is well known and established that probiotic mediated protective effects are 
highly strain specific, unless the authors use the same exact strains in group VI and VII, the 
results of the study would not be valid.  Hence the authors would also need to change the 
manuscript title accordingly. The authors could consider resubmitting the manuscript just 
investigating the effect of mono Vs poly probiotic strains of the lyophilized cultures.  
 
Minor comments  
- It would be  helpful if the authors could explain the use of MSG in the study and the 
MSG -obesity group? Is MSG the standard drug of choice to induce NAFLD in rats?  
 
 
- Inclusion of photographs from the histopathological sections for the different treatments 
would also benefit the manuscript  
 
- Results section, please make sure the correct fig and tables are mentioned in the text  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing in terests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in t he future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to th e content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do y ou have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  
If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
'I declare that I have no  competing interests'  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
 
assistant