Skip to main content
. 2023 Apr 30;2023:gigabyte80. doi: 10.46471/gigabyte.80
Reviewer name and names of any other individual's who aided in reviewer Nagasuma Chandra
Do you understand and agree to our policy of having open and named reviews, and having your review included with the published papers. (If no, please inform the editor that you cannot review this manuscript.) Yes
Is the language of sufficient quality? Yes
Please add additional comments on language quality to clarify if needed
Are all data available and do they match the descriptions in the paper? Yes
Additional Comments
Are the data and metadata consistent with relevant minimum information or reporting standards? See GigaDB checklists for examples <a href="http://gigadb.org/site/guide" target="_blank">http://gigadb.org/site/guide</a> Yes
Additional Comments
Is the data acquisition clear, complete and methodologically sound? Yes
Additional Comments
Is there sufficient detail in the methods and data-processing steps to allow reproduction? Yes
Additional Comments It would be useful if the authors could comment on how the models vary between the two species and with respect to M. tuberculosis. Specifically, a note on how the authors deal with alternate enzymes and whether they included enzymes specific to each species, would be helpful.
Is there sufficient data validation and statistical analyses of data quality? Yes
Additional Comments
Is the validation suitable for this type of data? Yes
Additional Comments A figure depicting the overall capability of the models would be useful
Is there sufficient information for others to reuse this dataset or integrate it with other data? Yes
Additional Comments
Any Additional Overall Comments to the Author Genome-scale metabolic models are useful to the community as they can be used to address a variety of questions. It would be useful if the authors could include a section on the comparative performance of the models and link it to the known metabolic capability of these microbes.
Recommendation Minor Revision