Digging Deeper through Biological Specimens Using Adaptive Optics-Based Optical Microscopy

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Section 2.1:

l.60: please detail the technology used to produce DM (materials,…).

Fig.1: increase the font of the text. A photo of a real DM or a dedicated schematic is necessary.

l.84: the sentence “This data can be used to calculate the shape of the DM surface required to 84 correct the aberration.” has to be detailed.

Fig.2: increase the font of the text. A photo of real SHWS or a dedicated schematic is necessary.

l.92: […] by adjusting the Fourier elements of illumination as it departs 92 the sample [8]” needs to be detailed. Indeed, some additional explanation on switching from the measurement to the analysis. Probably a schematic of the concept mentioning the Zernicke modes has to be included.

In general, for this section,

-          schematics to present the concepts and differences between the instruments should be included for helping the reader to understand properly every approach.

-          Additionally, the authors should include a table that resumes every approach available for AO, with the pros and cons.

-          The authors should discuss the measurement and computational time and data available for each approach and explain if it is a problem depending on the application.

-          Zernicke polynomial is a fundamental aspect of AO, thus, it should be explained.

 Section 3:

l.131: “possible fluorescence signal-to-noise ratio and resolution”. What does it mean? Please be more specific.

Fig. 3: scale bar has to be described. Every acronym has to be defined

Fig. 4: scale bar description for 4(c). Every acronym has to be defined

l.256: The main challenge of the AO is to correct the front waveform aberrations in real time according to the living eye mobility. The authors should discuss the speed, time, and complexity of implementing a such method for the living specimens (probably in the first part of section 2).

Fig. 5: scale bar description.

Fig.6: the quality of the figure should be improved.

Fig.7: Every acronym has to be defined.

Fig.8: Every acronym has to be defined.

In general for this applications section: for every implementation of AO into each technique (Fluorescence, OCT, super-resolution microscopy…), the authors should include more technical details about contrast/resolution improvements (and if it is linearly improved), the gain and loss of having AO in the setups (complexity to include additional optical path for instance? Drastically increasing the measurement time? increasing the post-data treatment complexity...) and how it affects the conventional imaging process.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your kind handling of this manuscript. We highly appreciate the insightful comments from the reviewer on our initial manuscript. We have incorporated the suggestions into a revised version. Please find below detailed responses to the reviewer’s comments and the respective changes as suggested by the reviewers. We hope that the modifications detailed below find positive feedback from the reviewers and meet the high standard of Photonics.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The comments are in the file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much for your kind handling of this manuscript. We highly appreciate the insightful comments from the reviewer on our initial manuscript. We have incorporated the suggestions into a revised version. Please find below detailed responses to the reviewer’s comments and the respective changes as suggested by the reviewers. We hope that the modifications detailed below find positive feedback from the reviewers and meet the high standard of Photonics.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Good luck.