Page 4 Line 57: “The most probable…”. This result might indicate that the 2001 reappearance of FMDV in Argentina was a persistent virus foci (maybe carrier?)…or maybe some missing links (i.e. sampling bias) exists in your data which are not including contemporary isolates from neighbouring countries (besides Brazil) and, therefore, this would impact on your results. Since this would be quite an interest topic (even though only on a retrospective line), you need to discuss this in more details, assessing as well the validity of your results.
Page 4 Line 57: “The most probable…”. This result might indicate that the 2001 reappearance of FMDV in Argentina was a persistent virus foci (maybe carrier?)…or maybe some missing links (i.e. sampling bias) exists in your data which are not including contemporary isolates from neighbouring countries (besides Brazil) and, therefore, this would impact on your results. Since this would be quite an interest topic (even though only on a retrospective line), you need to discuss this in more details, assessing as well the validity of your results.