Reviewer's report
Title:Knockout of MIMP protein in Lactobacillus plantarum lost its regulation of
intestinal permeability on NCM460 epithelial cells via the zonulin pathway
Version:1Date:6 November 2013
Reviewer: Peter Malfertheiner
Reviewer's report:
The current paper from Liu et al. is dedicated to functional analyses of micro
integral membrane protein (MIMP) of Lactobacillus plantarum. Based on the
presented results the authors conclude that MIMPS plays an important protective
role in intestinal permeability in vitro and in vivo. The data are sound and
methods are well described. Overall the discussion and conclusion are in
accordance with results.
Minor comments:
1) Abstract needs editing: more detailed information in results, improve language,
typos and abbreviations, conclusions may be at least partially moved to results.
2) The authors may wish to speculate/discuss potential implication of their
observations.
3) Legends to Figures 2 and 3 are not sufficiently descriptive and need to be
revised (labeling, description, statistical analyses). Number of animals used etc.
4) Figures: labeling needs revision for example - letters should not be inside of
the figures. Signs for statistical analyses should be clearly labeled similarly in all
figures (for example next to the group).
5) Some language editing is needed.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Knockout of MIMP protein in Lactobacillus plantarum lost its regulation of
intestinal permeability on NCM460 epithelial cells via the zonulin pathway
Version:1Date:6 November 2013
Reviewer: Peter Malfertheiner
Reviewer's report:
The current paper from Liu et al. is dedicated to functional analyses of micro
integral membrane protein (MIMP) of Lactobacillus plantarum. Based on the
presented results the authors conclude that MIMPS plays an important protective
role in intestinal permeability in vitro and in vivo. The data are sound and
methods are well described. Overall the discussion and conclusion are in
accordance with results.
Minor comments:
1) Abstract needs editing: more detailed information in results, improve language,
typos and abbreviations, conclusions may be at least partially moved to results.
2) The authors may wish to speculate/discuss potential implication of their
observations.
3) Legends to Figures 2 and 3 are not sufficiently descriptive and need to be
revised (labeling, description, statistical analyses). Number of animals used etc.
4) Figures: labeling needs revision for example - letters should not be inside of
the figures. Signs for statistical analyses should be clearly labeled similarly in all
figures (for example next to the group).
5) Some language editing is needed.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Knockout of MIMP protein in Lactobacillus plantarum lost its regulation of
intestinal permeability on NCM460 epithelial cells via the zonulin pathway
Version:1Date:6 November 2013
Reviewer: Peter Malfertheiner
Reviewer's report:
The current paper from Liu et al. is dedicated to functional analyses of micro
integral membrane protein (MIMP) of Lactobacillus plantarum. Based on the
presented results the authors conclude that MIMPS plays an important protective
role in intestinal permeability in vitro and in vivo. The data are sound and
methods are well described. Overall the discussion and conclusion are in
accordance with results.
Minor comments:
1) Abstract needs editing: more detailed information in results, improve language,
typos and abbreviations, conclusions may be at least partially moved to results.
2) The authors may wish to speculate/discuss potential implication of their
observations.
3) Legends to Figures 2 and 3 are not sufficiently descriptive and need to be
revised (labeling, description, statistical analyses). Number of animals used etc.
4) Figures: labeling needs revision for example - letters should not be inside of
the figures. Signs for statistical analyses should be clearly labeled similarly in all
figures (for example next to the group).
5) Some language editing is needed.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant