Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. In Abstract, the term "higher interaction" sounds strange, better use "stronger interaction".
2. Probably the introduction can be improved. Till the measurements and results are described, it isn't clear what kind of optical resonances are going to be studied. The term "Fabry-Pérot interferometry" makes an impression that there should be some very sharp optical resonances, but basically it is just thin film interference observed in reflectance.
3. I suggest showing the formula used for calculating the porosity by Bruggeman theory (in subsection "Characterization of TiO2 films").
4. I suspect there are many papers devoted to the studies of porosity and refractive index of TiO2 thin films. Perhaps the results of this work could be compared to literature data.
5. It is stated that the refractive index and the thickness of the porous films were also estimated by the Transfer Matrix Method, but I cannot find such data in the results. Instead, profilometry was used.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript describes TiO2 mesoporous films for the development of optical detection layers. 

The manuscript does not present results on applicability of the device as a sensor. There is only one indication that additional work is needed to demonstrate biosensor application.

Authors can provide results on application as a sensor. Furthermore, I suggest improving the quality of the figures, especially those that contain photographs of the surfaces of the devices.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors performed as suggested by the reviewer.