Peer-reviewed by 2 reviewers with median rating of 13.5/20. Review process was triple-blinded.
Round 1 (11/20)
Round 2 (13.5/20)
Conceptual advance and Impact4
Useful experiment but could be more novel and impactful if it included D2S data.
It seems that the antagonist and agonist quotes (italics) are part of the data included in this experiment. I would delete the italicised text to avoid confusion and potential plagerism.
need to specify that this experiment is focussed on the D2L and also to descrive what the D2L vs D2s are.
please change text to read "...lumateperone at the D2L dopamine receptors..."
Given the drug has been proposed to have presynaptic agonist properties, a big lmitation of this experiment is the lack of D2S autoreceptor testing. This version of the D2 receptor may be where these propoerties are realised. Please either add this into this section or to the discussion.
Conceptual advance and Impact5.5
This is a good approach to measure effects of compounds modulating the G-proteins activity.
Some changes to improve the clarity of the presentation are necessary.
- better to give refs in the text, not in the abstract.
- to clarify here or in Results, what is the "intrinsic efficacy"
- Fig A,B. As the concentrations of cAMP were measured, it should be shown on the labels of the figs.
- it should be mentioned in the legend to the fig B how comparison with 1µM quinpirole was performed
- The sentence "The postsynaptic activity referred to by Snyder et al": To write in more clear way and give the reference number, i.e.7.
-To clarify, what is " the intrinsic efficacy'.
It the conclusion mentioned only the convenience of the approach to classify ligand interactions with different receptors but. The sentence clearly supporting the title should be added.
Several sentences in "Methods" repeats the figure legends.