Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Elife. 2022 Feb 1;11:e75922. doi: 10.7554/eLife.75922.
We thank Keith Matthews and Stephen Larcombe for their thoughtful comment, which follows the good tradition of public scientific discourse (Matthews and Larcombe, 2022). While their remarks have prompted us to take another critical look at our data, we think that they neither alter our conclusions nor offer a practical alternative explanation. In essence, we see two possible interpretations of our experiments: either the trypanosome life cycle can accommodate a more flexible role for the slender stage, or the definition of the stumpy stage needs to be radically changed. While the first interpretation - which we favour - would not falsify any published work, the second one - which Matthews and Larcombe are proposing - would contradict the literature. Hence, we favour a model with an unexpected phenotypic plasticity for the slender stage and a certain degree of stochasticity in the trypanosome life cycle.
我们感谢 Keith Matthews 和 Stephen Larcombe 的深思熟虑的评论,这遵循了公共科学话语的良好传统(Matthews 和 Larcombe,2022)。虽然他们的言论促使我们再次对我们的数据进行批判性审查,但我们认为他们既没有改变我们的结论,也没有提供实际的替代解释。从本质上讲,我们认为我们的实验有两种可能的解释:要么锥虫生命周期可以为纤细阶段提供更灵活的角色,要么需要彻底改变粗短阶段的定义。虽然我们赞成的第一种解释 - 不会否定任何已发表的工作,但 Matthews 和 Larcombe 提出的第二种解释 - 会与文献相矛盾。因此,我们赞成一种模型,其中纤细阶段具有出乎意料的表型可塑性,以及锥虫生命周期中存在一定程度的随机性。