Submited on: 11 Aug 2013 06:45:30 PM GMT
Published on: 12 Aug 2013 05:20:41 AM GMT
 
Decent study that merits further interest
Posted by Mr. Jarrod Creameans on 02 Nov 2017 03:26:05 PM GMT Reviewed by Interested Peers

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

    That particle bombardment-mediated gene transfer is a strategy worth trying with cotton becuase it is typically very efficient with a high yield of successful transformation. Research to identify a more widely accessible technique for gene transfer into cotton is warranted due to the difficulty of it and previous failures to do so. 


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

    If you take into account the cultivar used in the study (NH 545), these are relatively novel claims but particle bombardment has been done in multiple varieties of cotton already (sources below).

     

    Rajasekaran K, Grula JW, Hudspeth RL, Pofelis S, Anderson DM. 1996. Herbicide-resistant Acala and Coker cottons transformed with a native gene encoding mutant forms of acetohydroxy acid synthase. Mol. Breed. 2: 307-319

     

    Rajasekaran K, Hudspeth RL, Cary JW, Anderson DM, Clevland TE. 2000. High frequency stable transformation of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) by particle bombardment of embryogenic cell suspension cultures. Plant Cell Rep. 19: 539-545


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

    Yes, they are simply developing an already well-known method in plant biotechnology for a specific cultivar that could prove to be useful in agriculture. 


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

    Yes, given that the success rate of the transformation method is 3%, their claims that cotton has been regarded as, "recalcitrant to transformation." The notion that the high success rate of particle bombarment gene transfer would effectively counter the difficulty of cotton gene transfer enough to yield a successful transformation is not supported by the results, however.


  • 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?

    No, the protocol is relatively simple since there are relatively defined protocols for this technique already with cotton. 


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

    Yes, the experiments are clearly outlined to the point that they could be clearly reproduced.


  • 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?

    The only thing that comes to mind is re-doing the experiment entirely, which I don't think is necessary. The paper is a simple method paper and unless this work is important for future work to the lab, it does not merit much further study.


  • 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?

    No, it does not have a high impact or engage in any paradigm shifts, which is especially due to the unsuccessfulness of the experiment. 


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Competing interests:
    .
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Research Assistant in Plant Biotech, four years

  • How to cite:  Creameans J .Decent study that merits further interest[Review of the article 'Particle Bombardment: Not a Good Approach for Gene Transfer into Embryonic Axes of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Cultivars ' by Dangat S].WebmedCentral 2013;8(11):WMCRW003389
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Decent study lacking rationale
Posted by Mr. Jarrod Creameans on 27 Oct 2017 06:43:28 PM GMT Reviewed by Interested Peers

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

    That biolistic gene transfer of the cry 1(A)c gene can be achieved with the NH 545 cultivar of cotton.


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

    Yes, with this particular cultivar of cotton. 


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

    Yes.


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

    No, a more successful transformation would need to be done. 


  • 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?

    No.


  • 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?

    Only re-running the gene transfer experiments.


  • 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?

    No, this type of work has been done multiple times in the future and there are useful transgenic cotton cultivars being used widely already.


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Competing interests:
    .
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    4 years as research assistant in plant biotechnology including vast experience with genetic transfer with different methods.

  • How to cite:  Creameans J .Decent study lacking rationale[Review of the article 'Particle Bombardment: Not a Good Approach for Gene Transfer into Embryonic Axes of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Cultivars ' by Dangat S].WebmedCentral 2013;8(10):WMCRW003368
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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

    Biotechnology: Gene transfer


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

    Yes


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

    Yes


  • 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?

    Yes


  • 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?

    No


  • 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?

    Yes, Gene transfer espaciaaly with Bt and cotton is important fot insects control and cotton industry.


  • Other Comments:

    References in this article is numbereted if this accorrding to WebmedCentral publication  style ok, if not please remove the numbers from references.

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:

    Yes

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Yes

  • How to cite:  Fetoh B .Particle Bombardment: Not a Good Approach for Gene Transfer into Embryonic Axes of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Cultivars[Review of the article 'Particle Bombardment: Not a Good Approach for Gene Transfer into Embryonic Axes of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Cultivars ' by Dangat S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(8):WMCRW002844
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse