Need an argumentative essay on Critical reviwe on ' Cutting Edge: Immunity against a Silent SalivaryAntigen of the Lyme Vector Ixodes scapularis Impairs'. Needs to be 2 pages. Please no plagiarism.The

Need an argumentative essay on Critical reviwe on ' Cutting Edge: Immunity against a Silent SalivaryAntigen of the Lyme Vector Ixodes scapularis Impairs'. Needs to be 2 pages. Please no plagiarism.

The study showed that: (1) sialostatin L2 has an important role in nymphal or tick infestation that can be blocked by host immunity and (2) immunity to sialostatin was only induced after vaccination with the protein.

The abstract was able to present the rationale, objectives, methods, and results of the study. Conclusions, however, were not clearly stated. In the introduction, a concise summary was given about current knowledge of salivary antigens that pass on the pathogen Borrelia burgdorfer. Questions that arose out of the current knowledge served as the rationale for the study. Aims were not clearly stated in the introduction part. Instead, a summary of the research was given in the introduction. The use of standard methods meant that these techniques have already been reviewed and criticized by other researchers. Statistical analysis used was appropriate. ANOVA is appropriate for quantitative data like weight, number. The chi square tests were appropriate for qualitative data. The number of replications used was not directly mentioned, although Figure 1A was labelled to show that there were four animals in a treatment. It was not mentioned if this was number of samples or if one animal represented one replicate.

The presentation of the results was lengthy with a tendency to repeat the methodology. The text was continuous, (there were no subheadings), making it difficult to read and absorb the information given. The illustrations in the paper were not clear and uniform. Letters and axis titles were irregular and captions were very long. As an example, Figure 2A was very small and the legends were difficult to read. Nevertheless, the interpretation of the data was justified by the results with the study was discussed in the context of the previous research. The conclusion that some salivary components are undetectable by humoral immunity and that sialostatin L2 was a silent antigen (Ag) appeared