Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Teladorsagia circumcincta

WikiJournal of Science/Teladorsagia circumcincta

Plagiarism check

Pass. WMF copyvio tool using TurnItIn. Fully unique content. --Florian (Elmidae) (talk · contribs) 16:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

First peer review

Review by Andrew Forbes , University of Iowa
These assessment comments were submitted on 20 Dec 2018, and refer to this previous version of the article

This is a well written mini-review with strong sections on genetics and immune responsiveness, as would be expected from the authorship. The section on epidemiology lacks clarity in parts:

• The sentence commencing “Nematode development…” appears to be related to the free-living stages (eggs to infective larvae), yet the second part of the sentence refers to “egg production”, which is function of the adult parasitic stages.
• The following sentence states the “infection gradually dies down”, but it is not clear if this is in reference to the free-living or parasitic stages.
• The remainder of this paragraph refers to “season” several times, but it is not clear what this refers to: the grazing season; the season for development of free living stages; the season for acquisition of infection, etc.
• The second paragraph goes into some detail on the variation in faecal egg counts, but there is no obvious link to the epidemiology of infection (in lambs). The last sentence doesn’t seem to lead anywhere.

Although the subject of control is vast and very difficult to condense into a single paragraph, nonetheless, there are a few elements that could benefit from re-wording:

• Grazing management specifically targeting nematode control, other than mixed/sequential grazing with cattle, is rarely easy at farm level and I am not convinced it is widely used – references would be useful to support this sentence.
• Biological control with nematophagous fungi can be successful, but it is subject to the vagaries of weather and may be difficult to manage within a commercial farm setting.
• A mention of refugia and targeted selective treatment could be useful here.

This text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike 3.0 Unported License.

Response

• The sentence commencing “Nematode development…” has been rewritten to make it clearer.
• ‘The following sentence states the “infection gradually dies down …’ has also been rewritten.
• ‘The remainder of this paragraph refers to “season” several times’ has been clarified.
• ‘The second paragraph …’ Epidemiology is also about variation among individuals in susceptibility to infection.
• ‘Grazing management’ see VB12.
• ‘Biological control’ We agree but don’t feel that the text needs to be changed.
• ‘A mention of refugia and targeted selective treatment could be useful here’ see VB11

Second peer review

reviewer-annotated pdf

Review by Joaquin M. Prada , University of Surrey
These assessment comments were submitted on 10 Jan 2019, and refer to this previous version of the article

I found the short article (or more overview article) really clear and concise, I think the authors did a very good job and I hope it will be useful for readers as a brief introduction to this parasite. I have some small specific comments (see next pages, where I copied the article). Also:

• I would suggest a few more lines on the modelling (does not need to be too long), maybe touch on the recent developments or challenges?
• The control section I think would benefit of some quantification (i.e. how much does each control method provide? X% reduction in Y years or something like that?
• The additional information has not been completed
• I think it would be nice to have at least one figure, for example the life-cycle, the CDC figure could be freely available (probably worth checking copyright)

This text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike 3.0 Unported License.

See attached pdf file for detailed in-text comments.

Response

• ‘… a few more lines on the modelling …’ Done.
• ‘The control section I think would benefit of some quantification’ . Unfortunately the available data cannot be reliably extrapolated to all situations and would need too many qualifications to fit into this review.
• The additional information has now been completed.
• We are working on a figure.
• Comments in text
• JP1 There is no upper limit to the prepatent period.
• JP2 Done
• JP3 Done.

Third peer review

reviewer-annotated pdf

Review by Valentina Busin , University of Glasgow
These assessment comments were submitted on 19 Jan 2019, and refer to this previous version of the article

This is a very clear and well described overview of an important parasite. It needs in my opinion some more general and applied information to cover the potential audience of this article (e.g. clinical signs, diagnostics and some more details on the option for treatment – specifically anthelmintic).

This text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike 3.0 Unported License.

See attached pdf file for detailed in-text comments.

Response

• We have made all the suggested corrections in the text except where indicated.
• VB1. Teladorsagia infections are widely believed, almost certainly correctly, to cause losses in goats but we could find no published information on this. There is also some concern that goats, like muskoxen, may have a distinct species of Teladorsagia which would complicate the estimates of economic loss.
• VB2. There is no reason to start with the largest grouping. The arrangements at phylum and just below are not discussed and at not relevant to this article..
• VB3 References updated as suggested.
• Life cycle text. Gastric glands are as the name suggests only present in the abomasum. The prepatent period can be much longer than 21 days. Stear et al. 1995 found one animal in a deliberate infection had a prepatent period of 56 days.
• VB4 Reference added as suggested.
• VB5 Text modified as suggested.
• VB6 Text modified as suggested.
• VB7 The temperatures for development vary within and among countries; this may reflect local adaptations as well as differences in technique. To go into detail would require a different paper.
• VB8 We have added a section on diagnosis and clinical signs. We do not feel that the genetics section should be simplified or condensed. Many breeders have asked us for this level of information.
• VB9 The pathology needs to come after the immunology because the pathology is immune-mediated. However, we have (VB8) created a separate section on diagnosis and clinical signs and placed it earlier as suggested.
• VB10 See VB8 and VB9.
• VB11 Anthelmintic formulations and the levels of resistance to the various anthelmintics vary between countries and change quite rapidly over time. We don’t feel that an extended discussion of anthelmintics and anthelmintic resistance would be especially useful in this review. Our concern is that the information would quickly become dated and might be misused by a farmer looking to treat his animals in the future. Other websites discuss anthelmintics and anthelmintic resistance in considerable depth.
• VB12 The published literature as cited suggests that most sheep farmers in the UK use some form of grazing management. I think that the difference lies in what is meant by grazing management. It incorporates a wide range of strategies, including cograzing, moving animals between pastures, taking history of grazing into account when selecting paddocks and so on. Valentina may have a more restricted use in mind.
• VB13 We do not believe that nutritional supplementation is necessarily impractical. At its simplest it merely involves putting extra feed into feed troughs in paddocks.