Next Article in Journal
Energy Return on Investment of Major Energy Carriers: Review and Harmonization
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluating the Effect of Redundant Resources on Corporate Entrepreneurial Performance
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Weathering and Antimicrobial Properties of Laminate and Powder Coatings Containing Silver Phosphate Glass Used as High-Touch Surfaces

Sustainability 2022, 14(12), 7102; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127102
by Eva Blomberg 1, Gunilla Herting 1, Gunaratna Kuttuva Rajarao 2, Tuomas Mehtiö 3, Mikko Uusinoka 4, Merja Ahonen 5, Riika Mäkinen 5, Tiina Mäkitalo 6 and Inger Odnevall 1,7,8,*
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Sustainability 2022, 14(12), 7102; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127102
Submission received: 20 April 2022 / Revised: 1 June 2022 / Accepted: 7 June 2022 / Published: 9 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Chemical Engineering and Technology)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

What were the reasons for choosing only these strains of microorganisms (Escherichia Coli and Bacillus subtilis) for testing?

In my opinion, it would be worthwhile to use either resistant strains of microorganisms or conditionally pathogenic ones to prove the pronounced antimicrobial action of the presented coatings.

In my opinion, if you are writing about the study of antimicrobial activity of used surfaces, it is not worth talking about antiviral action, even in the introduction. Focus on the antimicrobial action you have studied.

Figures 8, 9 and 10 show the survival data of microorganisms during their incubation with analogs of the surfaces of the studied coatings. How many measurements were made and what was used as a control?

Why do you compare different detergents, and the initial concentration of microorganisms in the control was different? (figures 12 and 13)

Table 1 is incomprehensible. It is necessary to clarify the concentration of detergents and explain why these detergents are taken in different volumetric concentrations.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The present manuscript can be accepted after addressing the following comments:

1) There are numerous grammatical mistakes in the manuscript.

2) The relative EDS and XPS analysis should be provided in the manuscript. 

3) The quality of all the figures is very poor.

4) Fig. 8. It seems like pre-weathering duration did not have any effect on the E.coli. why?

5) Conclusion needs to be consize and to the point. 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors established an in-vitro method to evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy and surface reactivity of commercial laminate and powder coated surfaces treated with silver‐doped phosphate glass as antimicrobial additives. The method was reliable and the results were sound. The topic fits the aim of the journal very well. The paper has been drafted well and can be published as such.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear publishers! This article in its presented form can be accepted for publication

Back to TopTop