The peer review process is often seen as something that ends at the point of publication. But it is only after publication that most conversations surrounding a paper can begin! By virtue of an extended audience, often the feedback one receives at this post-publication stage is just as valuable as the feedback received during the initial peer review process.
This was perhaps best-emphasized to me following a recent publication on antimicrobial peptide evolution in Diptera. Our reviewers for this publication were experts in insect immunity and symbiosis, and contributed valuable input to improve the manuscript as a whole. However it was only after presenting this work to a diverse audience that key questions regarding some elements of the story were asked. Herein I summarize these key questions raised, and provide answers that hopefully further improve the reader's confidence in the claims made in the publication:
Hanson MA, Lemaitre B, Unckless RL. 2019. Dynamic Evolution of Antimicrobial Peptides Underscores Trade-Offs Between Immunity and Ecological Fitness. Frontiers in Immunology, 10, 2620. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2019.02620