Skip to PREreview

PREreview of Antibacterial activity of tamoxifen derivatives against methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus

by Nikhil Srivastava and Aniket Sharma
Published
DOI
10.5281/zenodo.13008200
License
CC BY 4.0

Review for : Antibacterial activity of tamoxifen derivatives against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

by Aniket Sharma1,# and Nikhil Srivastava1,#

1Department of Animal Science, University of Wyoming, USA

#Contributed equally

1. Line 35: The term "microdilution assay" should be corrected to "microbroth dilution assay."

2. Line 57: The word "isolates" is misspelled.

3. Line 70: A reference is missing.

4. Materials and Methods Section: There are crucial details missing about the isolation procedure and the source of the isolates. Additionally, there is no information about ethical clearance for these clinical samples.

5. Line 235: The correct term should be "Luria-Bertani broth."

6. MIC Controls: The rationale behind using P. aeruginosa as a positive control needs to be provided, information regarding negative control, solvent control for the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) assay is missing.

8. MIC Analysis: Information regarding how the MIC results were analyzed, whether spectrophotometrically or dye-based, is missing.

9. Bacterial Growth Curve: The reason for using a 1/200 dilution for making the bacterial growth curve should be explained.

10. Membrane Permeability Assay: The starting concentration of cells is not mentioned.

11. Fluorescence Monitoring: The use of fluorescence monitoring with a Typhoon FLA scanner in the membrane permeability assay should be explained in more detail.

12. Alternative Methods: Consider using spectrophotometry as an alternate method for measuring fluorescence.

13. Negative Control for Membrane Permeability: There should be a negative control in the membrane permeability assay that is expected to show increased fluorescence at MIC levels.

14. MDS Data: Information about the molecular dynamic simulation (MDS) data with derivative 2 is missing.

  1. In general, there are multiple spelling and grammatical errors which should be addressed.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.