Hacking Commensal Bacteria to Consolidate the Adaptive Mucosal Immune Response in the Gut–Lung Axis: Future Possibilities for SARS-CoV-2 Protection

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I congratulate the authors for the excellent review. The theme is robust and brings important updates for the reader. In this way, this rapporteur accepts the manuscript as it is. and Wish the research group success.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your commendation. We appreciate your time for reviewing our manuscript with MDPI biotech.

Reviewer 2 Report

Extensive editing of English language and style is required, particularly in the abstract in the use of singulars and plurals. All references will have to be corrected. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions. We have now had a native English-speaking colleague to check the grammar. We have also now also fixed the errors caused by post-formatting. We apologize for any confusion.

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript no. biotech-1473125 was assessed for possible publication in Frontiers in Veterinary Science. Some of the comments are as bellow:
-       All cited references in the text contained an error. Just cited references in table 2 are correct, but it seems that their related references are not correct. 
-       It seems that the authors mainly focused on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, while there is no mention in the title. I think the title is not suitable for this manuscript and authors can provide another more conceptual title. In addition, introduction section has been mainly explained about SARS-CoV-2 vaccines while it has been finally just exampled as one of the achievements in the end of introduction.
-    The title of table 2 is not related.

-    I suggest the authors design a figure to show the aim of current manuscript more inteligible. 
-    In total, it seems that the authors tried to explain about the importance of commensal microbiota on consolidation of the adaptive immune responses, while it is not understood after reading the text. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

Thank you for your time in reviewing our manuscript. We apologize especially for the confusion created by the final formatting that created errors in the manuscript.

Please find below the point-by-point response to your comments. Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Pereira  M et al.’s manuscript “Hacking commensal bacteria to consolidate the adaptive immune response” reviewed the progress of mucosal vaccine vectors and discussed the mucosal immune systems, gut-lung axis microbiome, as well as the relationship between the microbiome and mucosal immunity. Overall, the manuscript by Pereira  M and colleagues is timely with well-organization. However, there are some areas of the manuscript that are unclear that would benefit from further clarification.

1. As a review paper, the references are essential to help us understand the background and previous work. However, there are many mistakes in the reference’s insertion due to the formatting problem. Can authors be careful and double-check before submitting their manuscript?
2. Authors mainly focus on three major parts in this manuscript: Section 3, how to apply reverse vaccinology in bacterial mucosal vaccine vector designs; Section 4, the complicated relationship between the microbiome and mucosal immunity and section 5, bacterial mucosal vaccines in literature. However, to me, those sections did not show a very close connection in terms of logic. In addition, for section 3, many general descriptions here. The authors should add more detailed and specific points in this section. Can add some specific examples to show how to use reverse vaccinology to design bacterial mucosal vaccine vector (references, 1,2,3….).
3. An integrated and comprehensive figure to model the role of the gut-lung axis in bacterial mucosal vaccines is required and will enhance the impact of this manuscript.
4. Please double-check the typo throughout the manuscript, such as line 87, etc.…

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your time in reviewing our manuscript. We apologize especially for the confusion created by the final formatting that created errors in the manuscript.

Please find below the point-by-point response to your comments. Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Authors revised the manuscript based on comments and I think this revised manuscript is proper to publish. Just one point, the authors should indicate if the figure needs permission.