Nanoplastic-Induced Nanostructural, Nanomechanical, and Antioxidant Response of Marine Diatom Cylindrotheca closterium
, Petra Vukosav 1, Bruno Komazec 2, Cécile Formosa-Dague 3, Darija Domazet Jurašin 1, Petra Peharec Štefanić 2, Andrea Čačković 1, Krunoslav Juraić 1 and Nadica Ivošević DeNardis 1
Miguel I. Uyaguari-Díaz
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Page 1, abstract: after short-term exposure, state the number of hours or days. In other words specify in the same context as longer exposure (14 days).
Page 1, introduction: you can highlight the ubiquity of plastics and micro plastics by adding the following reference found and reported in humans:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022001258
Page 2, delete the article 'the' before aquatic environments [14].
Page 3. I am puzzled how these concentrations for the exposure experiments were selected. Are they environmentally relevant, if so, please justify with references.
Page 3, further information is required about the statistical tests here used. I had to check them in results and graphs. However, you should introduce how the analysis were conducted in this part (statistical analysis: gem followed by Newman-Keuls post-hoc test and paired t-test, please see below about the use of unpaired t-test). Also did you use any transformation to the data. Please include this information.
page 7 and 8. Figure 3, I acknowledge the figure, but is missing asterisks or something to indicate significant differences detected over time. As the graph is displayed it seems there were no differences between concentrations. Moreover, these numbers are based on duplicate and not biological replicate, which could have enhanced the findings reported not only here in this experiment, but in the others figures as well.
Page 8, after: 0.56 div d-1. Use superscripts for div-1
Page 9, Figure 4, why a bar chart was chosen instead of box plots?. Same comment for figures 5 and 6.
Page 11, figure at the bottom makes difficult to read the text. At least on the version I got. Modify it.
Page 12, figure 7. Why an unpaired t-test was selected. A proc GLM or paired ANOVA is a better choice than an unpaired t-test (comparisons of two treatments at the time).
Page 12, the NPs concentration here used by the authors, are they environmental relevant, if so, please justify earlier (methods section).
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper entitled “Nanoplastic-induced Nanostructural, Nanomechanical, and Antioxidant Response of Marine Diatom” describes the effects of nanoparticles of polystyrene (PS) on the growth and other several parameters of a diatom species with a discussion on the differences between negatively and positively charged PS nanoparticles.
Objectives are very important and obvious, data obtained are clear, and a conclusion is also appropriate. A reviewer supposes this article is acceptable after some minor corrections.
In general
A reviewer suggests to add the name of diatom species at the end of the title. Please put the continuously numbered lines in the text of the revised version. In addition, there are so many abbreviations in the text. A reviewer suggests to prepare a table listing all the abbreviations after the Introduction.
In the Discussion part, please add which results (which figures or tables) you are discussing on for readers’ better understanding.
Specific comments
Comments are described in the PDF file. Please see and correct them appropriately.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
