Next Article in Journal
A Study on the Material Composition and Traceability of the Wellhead Blockage in the Process of Oil and Gas Exploitation—A Case of the DH231 Well in the Tarim Basin, China
Previous Article in Journal
Surface Quality Evolution Model and Consistency Control Method of Large Shaft Multi-Pass Grinding
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Some Bioactivities of Isolated Apigenin-7-O-glucoside and Luteolin-7-O-glucoside

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(3), 1503; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031503
by Esen Sezen Karaoğlan 1,*, Hayrunisa Hancı 2, Mehmet Koca 3 and Cavit Kazaz 4
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(3), 1503; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031503
Submission received: 6 December 2022 / Revised: 12 January 2023 / Accepted: 18 January 2023 / Published: 23 January 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. written in scientific name please according to scientific name role,  for the first complete writing, the next writing is abbreviated

2. pada result 3.2. sebelum tabel tolong tambahkan narasi beberapa kalimat

3. Tabel 1. penulisan nama ilmiah disesuaikan

4. pada result 3.3. sebelum tabel tambahkan narasi

5. Pada 3.4. tolong tambahkan narasi sebelum tabel

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. As you have suggested, the required corrections have been accomplished and rearranged. The revised manuscript was uploaded to the journal system.

Sincrely

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The attached article " Some Bioactivities of Isolated Apigenin-7-O-glucoside and Luteolin-7-O-glucoside" by Karaoğlan et al. Proposed isolations of two known compounds from Stachys lavandulifolia  column chromatography. This article is good. I recommend following major suggestions will enhance the paper quality .  

-Abstract: The abstract logic of the expression for the target of the target compound and its role must be highlighted along with the aim of this article. It does not show a proper link with the methodology and highlights the significance finding of the article.

-Introduction:  line 38 onward must be include the introduction of the species and its general characters

The flow of the aforementioned parts in the introduction is challenging to follow. In particular, lines 82-85 don't seem to relate much to this paper. From a scientific and linguistic perspective, it should start with the importance of bioactive and across regions.

-Aims and objectives of the current study are missing

- Methodology: It is essential that the authors clearly explain their methodology  and mentioned a detailed about the analysis of NMR, as well as justify whether GC-MS analysis have been done for this specie? NMR and Please provide the UV spectra and NMR spectra.

_ Please make another heading about identification of plants and please mentioned the name of taxonomist who identify the plant.

- Overall, the paper appears to be descriptive and there is no statical model. I will propose to apply some models to make the reader's comprehension easier.

-Result. Need more justification and detail.

Discussion: Is very week that needs to be more detailed. Why do the methods in the manuscript have these characteristics and what are the significant results? And what findings were compared? This should be summarized in depth

I will suggest to the authors must highlight the most significant results and need to compared with the earlier studies

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. As you have suggested, the required corrections have been accomplished and rearranged. The revised manuscript was uploaded to the journal system.

Sincrely

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

thank you, the manuscript has been corrected according to the comments, I agree with your improvement, there are no more comments from me.

Reviewer 2 Report

Accepted

Back to TopTop