Submited on: 12 Jun 2012 07:24:22 PM GMT
Published on: 13 Jun 2012 01:46:15 PM GMT
 

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

    The paper claims stimulation of dietary stress produced in streptozocin-induced diabetic condition and starvation alters anatomy of the adrenal cortex and its metabolic status.


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

    This paper is interesting. The claim is not novel. It investigates the effect of dietary stress produced by induction of diabetes by streptozocin and starvation on adrenocortical microanatomy and lactic acid dehdrogenase activity.  The fact that diabetes and starvation produce stress is well-known.  Investigation on microanatomy of the adrenal cortex and LDH activity are interesting. However, the claims are not novel and the experiments were not designed neatly to address the question.


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

    The claim is not properly placed in the context of the previous literature. The paper lacks presentation of previous work.


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

    Results described support the claims, but not presented appropriately in a well-designed manner.


  • 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?

    Protocol for experimental method is alright. Deviations and the results discussed are inadequate.


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

    Methodology is valid. Only one comment I have the investigators used distilled water as a vehicle to inject to control and experimental rats. 0.9% saline water should be used to maintain physiologic osmolarity.


  • 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?

    Experiments are inadequate to prove the claim. Additional well-designed experiments are needed.


  • 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?

    This paper asks important questions .However, it is not well-designed and needs additional experiments to draw conclusion.


  • Other Comments:

    Methods: Experimental design is written poorly.It does not appropriately describe how long the animals were starved. It describes “…during the period of the experiment”. It is not written clearly. If the starved rats were sacrificed on days 3, 7 and 14, no appropriate controls were described for this group clearly. Group 2 rats were injected with distilled water. Normally researchers use standard saline water (0.9% sodium chloride) or vehicle to treat corresponding control while doing i.p. injections. Also streptozocin solution is prepared in 0.9% saline to maintain a physiologic concentration. Using 0.9% saline would maintain physiologic osmolarity. Direct use of distilled water as vehicle is not recommended.GOD-POD method described in methods section has not been referenced in the text and is not described and this needs to be described.Methods section is mentioning recording of body weights and the food consumption. However the food consumption data has not been tabulated elsewhere in the manuscript. Although it is not required, showing and interpreting these data would have been interesting.Method section describes weighing of adrenal glands and use of the appropriate portions of this tissue for LDH activity. It is important to describe which part of the tissue was used, how it was fractionated (tissue homogenate?) or which subcellular fraction was used and how it was prepared for biochemical assay of LDH activity. The purpose of measuring LDH is not discussed.

     

    Results:The microanatomical photographs are not matching as described in the text as Plates 2 &3. Instead they have been described as illustrations. A sequential and nice presentation of the data is a representation of a good scientific paper. This is not present in the current paper.Microphotographs are not very clear and they did not clearly indicate the location of major focus of the data.Result from day 14 observation has not been described.Photomicrographs (microanatomy) of the adrenal cortex for the day 3-, 7-, and 14-day treatment have not been shown and would have been interesting. These data are relevant and important to the paper of interest.Result for LDH activity is described and this is labeled in illustration 7. It is not described as Figure 1 and Figure 2 as mentioned in the result section of the paper.Results on LDH activity for the diabetic and diabetic control groups have not been described. Data presentation with perfect and appropriate experimental design is very important to present scientific data.

     

    Discussion: It lacks proper reference.  Relationship among dietary stress, adrenocortical energy status and intestinal NaKATPase, their roles, and purpose of LDH assay are not discussed. This paper did not assay for coenzyme A, but discusses about it.  Glycolysis breaks down glucose to produce pyruvate in the cytosol, not within the mitochondria. The authors mention: “CoA molecules feed pyruvate into a complex series of chemical reactions that produces molecules of ATP”. Pyruvate dehydrogenase converts pyruvate to acetyl-CoA that enters into the TCA cycle and electrons generated are passed through the electron transport chain and forms ATP. Overall, the discussion section is written poorly.

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • 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:

    20 years

  • How to cite:  Sarkar P K.Impact of induction of dietary stress by diabetes and starvation on adrenocortical anatomy and energy metabolism. [Review of the article ' Dietary Stress and Energy Metabolism: Evaluation of the Adrenal Cortex ' by Shotunde D].WebmedCentral 2012;3(7):WMCRW002020
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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

    The main claim is that the response of the adrenal gland to starvation and streptozotocin induced diabettes is similar from morphological and some biochemical point of view, the understanding of this assertion over a period of time might shed light on the morphological progression of streptozotocin induced diabettes pathogenesis as it affects the adrenal gland which is the major stress coping organ of the body.


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

    The claims are novel and very illuminating especially in striking the similarity between starvation and streptozotocin induced diabettes with respect to the morphological changes in the adrenal gland


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

    The literature did not succintly expose the obvious gap in knowledge, a further literature review will make the knowledge gap very conspicous.


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

    The result supports the claim of this work, however the presentation of the result will require an upgrade. For example the photomicrographs are not labelled, Illustration 1 did not indicate which of the controls (diabetic or starvation). The meaning of ME and ZR was not stated in illustration 2 and the hemmorhagic spots are not indicated. The photomicrographs are blurred generally, features are therefore very difficult to identify. Illustration 6 will need better arrangement, relative adrenal wt should be mean adrenal weight. Unit of measument should be clearly defined e.g. um on illustration 4. The photomicrographs of the cortico-medullary junction of the 3, 7 and 14 day groups will tell the story better.


  • 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?

    NA


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

    The methodology is very valid, however the details are scanty, foor example the starving regime was not explicit for the sake of reproducibility, the fixative used might make a whole difference and should therefore be stated. A strict demarcation between the sexes would have made for better discussion, sex hormones might have affected the outcome. the rationale behing the different method of sacrificing the animals should be explained.


  • 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?

    Yes, the discussion will be more robust if the sexes are separated and a closer interval of sacrifice such as 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12 and 14 days is used. This might be difficult to add to this work but might form the focus of further studies in this direction.


  • 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?

    The simple link between starvation and streptozotocin induced diabettes on the morphology of the adrenal gland make this work unique


  • Other Comments:

    This work is good, the author is encouraged to further the work along sex line as well as further the time line.

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

    NA

  • How to cite:  Ayannuga O .Dietary Stress and Energy Metabolism: Evaluation of the Adrenal Cortex[Review of the article ' Dietary Stress and Energy Metabolism: Evaluation of the Adrenal Cortex ' by Shotunde D].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW002002
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

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


    Dietary stress, diabetes  and its biochemical outcomes at Adrenal Cortex.

    Format:
    1. Abstract and the part of the methodology is repetitive. Abstract need to be re-written.
    2. Results and Discussion can be re-written together.
    3. There are format mistakes at reference list. Please be consistent with your reference writing format (please compare references 7 and 12).
    4.  Title needs to be specific.
    5. Illustrations and the figures should be related to each other so the author can easily locate the figures and tables.
     


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

    There are similar studies, but not the same methodological setting. This is the first study to show the direct relation between diabetes, starvation its relation to adrenal cortex, and LDH activity.

    If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Similar work-example:

    1. Animal study: Effects of streptozotocin-induced experimental diabetes on the morphology and function of the zona fasciculata of rat adrenal cortex.

    Rebuffat P, Belloni AS, Malendowicz LK, Mazzocchi G, Meneghelli V, Nussdorfer GG.
    SourceDepartment of Anatomy, University of Padua, Italy.

    2. Human Study: Diurnal behaviour of some salivary parameters in patients with diabetes mellitus (flow rate, pH, thiocianat, LDH activity)--note II.
    Ionescu S, B?di?? D, Artino M, Dragomir M, Huidovici E, Ni?? V, Chi?oi E.
    SourceCatedra de Fiziologie N. C. Paulescu, U.M.F. Carol Davila, Bucureti.

     


  • 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?

    n/a


  • 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?

    n/a


  • 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?

    n/a


  • Other Comments:

    n/a

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • 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:

    none

  • How to cite:  Guzey M .Dietary Stress and Energy Metabolism: Evaluation of Adrenal Cortex[Review of the article ' Dietary Stress and Energy Metabolism: Evaluation of the Adrenal Cortex ' by Shotunde D].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001975
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse