Submited on: 26 Sep 2010 07:33:03 PM GMT
Published on: 27 Sep 2010 07:17:49 AM GMT
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Is a thorough review and timely to update previous knowledge.  I have only one addition the author may wish to consider and that is Jakob-Hoff, Buchan et al 1999 Kiwi coccidia – North Island survey results Kokako 1 (6) 3-5.  I am not entirely sure about the volume number for Kokako.

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

    veterinary parasitologist

  • How to cite:  Pomroy B .An updated checklilst of helminth and protozoan parasites of birds in New Zealand[Review of the article 'An updated checklist of helminth and protozoan parasites of birds in New Zealand ' by McKenna P].WebmedCentral 2011;2(1):WMCRW00378
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • Other Comments: This publication is a very welcome and timely update of the only published comprehensive checklist of helminth and protozoan parasites of birds, both domestic and wild, in New Zealand. Since Dr McKenna published the first edition of this checklist over a decade ago, a substantial number of new host/parasite records have accumulated. These are often buried in laboratory and diagnostic reports and easily missed which makes the publication of this checklist so valuable. The list is easy to use and essentially comprises a host list, a parasite list and a reference list. The host list is arranged alphabetically by common names, although the taxonomic names are also given, making it very easy for anyone unfamiliar with a bird's taxonomic name to access the list of parasites recorded from it. The source reference for each parasite record is also indicated. The parasites, on the other hand, are listed taxonomically alongside the recorded bird hosts, so that determining from which hosts a particular parasite has been recorded, is also straightforward. The reference list is comprehensive with 126 references cited in all. In research into avian health and disease or conservation and management, particularly in relation to wild birds in New Zealand, parasites and their potential to cause disease are important considerations. Knowing what has or has not been recorded in this country is a key aspect of this. For anyone working in this area, this checklist is an absolutely indispensable and critical source of information, as was the first edition before.
  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    Almost 50 years researching and teaching veterinary parasitology
  • How to cite:  Charleston T .An Updated Checklist of Helminth & Protozoan Parasites of Birds in New Zealand[Review of the article 'An updated checklist of helminth and protozoan parasites of birds in New Zealand ' by McKenna P].WebmedCentral 2011;1(10):WMCRW0096
Report abuse