Submited on: 22 Feb 2013 10:06:23 PM GMT
Published on: 25 Feb 2013 07:28:39 AM GMT
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The paper claims that among the clones from Taenia crassiceps there was some genetic difference related to pathogenecity. which may be very interesting to note. such observation is proved by appropriate methodology. Infraclones is a long debated topic where in it has been normal obervation that a cloned one generally resembles in genetics with the mother DNA. though some physiological diffferences are already reported. very few studies have highlighted the variations in the pathogenecity among the cloned populations. susceptibility to a perticular pathogen, host specificity are really an interesting findings of the present study.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    The paper looks novel if it has been ethically done


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Enough experimental proof is provided


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    None


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    None


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    paper provides an input in to the genetic variation among the cloned species and have confirmed its relation to pathogenecity. which in future may be usefull in case of experimental pathogenicity studies as well as others


  • Other Comments:

    The paper looks interesting in its subject and iam sure will add to the present data.Pictures of RAPD analysis and other tables were not available and i could not review them. the variability of pathogenecity among the cloned population has been studied and host specificity is recorded. The study has highlighted that the infrapopulation among the cloned subjects have variable pathogenecity and that they also have varied host specificity regarding pathogenecity

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:

    No

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have read some articles in the related subject

  • How to cite:  Kandi V .Infrapopulation Among Clones in Taenia Crassiceps: RAPD Analysis[Review of the article 'Variability Between Infrapopulations of Infective and Non-Infective Taenia Crassiceps WFU Cysticerci ' by Willms K].WebmedCentral 2013;4(2):WMCRW002535
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse