Naturally Occurring Microbiota-Accessible Borates: A Focused Minireview

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The paper submitted by the research group of George Dan Mogoşanu is focused on the study of naturally occurring microbiota-accessible borates and it is presented as a short review article. The review is well written, and it captivates the interest of the reader with its writing style. It is also informative, and it is nice to read even if the topic is specific and maybe not well known among the wide audience. Besides this, the paper should be revised before further consideration. I report my comments below and, additionally, I would like to stress that the authors should improve the quality of presentation, as also figures are very important for a good review article.

 

Major points:

·      A major concern is about the overall organization of the manuscript into paragraphs. The chapters/paragraphs should follow a logic order. I did not understand why after section “2. Naturally Occurring Boron-Containing Complexes: from Prebiotic Chemistry to Biological Life”, which has a very strong chemical/biological background, the authors jump to “3. MABs and Healthy Host–Microbiome Symbiosis”. A connection, even a short paragraph at the end of section 2, would help the reader.

·      Section 4 must be revised. It is too long for a “focused review”: the main focus of this work should be on borates (the Journal itself is oriented towards inorganic chemistry), while in this section there are several nutritional/dietary aspects widely discussed.

·      Quality of presentation does not meet the standards of the Journal at this stage. Indeed, there is only one figure in the article, while a review should captivate the interest of the reader also through graphical representations. Figure 1, at the end of the paper, is only a list of bullet points, and the authors should improve this aspect.

 

Minor points:

·      Abstract could be revised and simplified: there are too many abbreviations. Additionally, some sentences are too high-sounding and colloquial (e.g. “nutrition to stay healthy and 27 live long”).

·      Introduction, page 2, line 50: “Boron (B) is a prebiotic element essential for life, influencing its origin and evolution. It is crucial for certain bacteria, plants, fungi, and algae” This part is rather generic. Since this is a (focused) review, the author should provide more details and references on this topic. Or, if the authors want to discuss this in the following paragraphs, they should specify it.

·      On the other hand, I find the paragraph on Mars confusing (page 2, line 97). How is it related to the rest of the work?

·      Conclusion section is very short, and the style is not consistent with the rest of the paper. Maybe some of the information discussed in the section “The Future of Personalized Nutrition” could be moved here.

Author Response

Naturally Occurring Microbiota-Accessible Borates: A Focused Minireview

Manuscript ID: inorganics-3283169

 

Dear Reviewer,

First of all, we would like to address you many thanks for your accurate observations and valuable comments. We used all these and improved the paper accordingly.

All changes in the revised manuscript were marked up using the “Track Changes” function.

The following changes have been made for the Manuscript (ID: inorganics-3283169):

 

Reviewer #1 questions/comments

The paper submitted by the research group of George Dan Mogoşanu is focused on the study of naturally occurring microbiota-accessible borates and it is presented as a short review article. The review is well written, and it captivates the interest of the reader with its writing style. It is also informative, and it is nice to read even if the topic is specific and maybe not well known among the wide audience. Besides this, the paper should be revised before further consideration. I report my comments below and, additionally, I would like to stress that the authors should improve the quality of presentation, as also figures are very important for a good review article.

 

Comments 1:

Major points: A major concern is about the overall organization of the manuscript into paragraphs. The chapters/paragraphs should follow a logical order. I did not understand why after section “2. Naturally Occurring Boron-Containing Complexes: from Prebiotic Chemistry to Biological Life”, which has a very strong chemical/biological background, the authors jump to “3. MABs and Healthy Host–Microbiome Symbiosis”. A connection, even a short paragraph at the end of section 2, would help the reader.

Response 1:

Thank you very much for your valuable suggestion. The connection has been realized by introducing a short paragraph at the end of Section 2, as follows: “Scientific data suggest that only plants have the ability to metabolize BA/borate and convert it into B–carbohydrates and B–polyphenols; humans and animals do not have this ability [5,8,46]. The indigestibility of B–carbohydrates in the plant diet of humans and animals is on average 10% [50], while B–polyphenols have an average indigestibility of 90% [8,9]. B–polyphenol species being thus accessible to the microbiota cause an in-crease in the level of volatile fatty acids (FAs) due to the increase in the activity of commensal bacteria, especially the level of butyrate (BUT) producers [5,8,15].” (See page 6, lines 460–466).

 

Comments 2:

Major points: Section 4 must be revised. It is too long for a “focused review”: the main focus of this work should be on borates (the Journal itself is oriented towards inorganic chemistry), while in this section there are several nutritional/dietary aspects widely discussed.

Response 2:

Thank you for pointing this out. Section 4 has been revised accordingly, and the following sentences have been eliminated:

▪ “Two key ages were determined, 40 and 60 years, in which major changes in the microbiome occur and which are correlated with major DYS. Around the age of 40, the consumption of alcohol and fats caused major DYS changes in the gut, and around the age of 60, a decrease in immune function correlated with DYS, and also with the consumption of fats, alcohol and coffee.” (See page 10, line 1002).

▪ “…, which have been labeled as a “super fruit” for their ability to prevent or alleviate numerous conditions such as CV syndromes, T2D and cancer”. (See page 12, line 1201).

▪ “…, such as cyanidin, pelargonidin and proanthocyanidins”. (See page 12, line 1202).

▪ “… Daily intake of apples is believed to reduce the incidence of CV syndromes and hypercholesterolemia”. (See page 12, line 1205).

▪ “High consumption of green tea has been shown to reduce the risk of dementia. In AD patients, green tea catechin polyphenols have demonstrated neuroprotective properties such as anti-inflammation, antioxidative stress, anti-apoptosis and the ability to inhibit beta-amyloid protein aggregation.” (See page 12, lines 1212–1213).

▪ “Research indicates that populations in Blue Zones (BZs), areas of the globe where human longevity is notably high, are not strict vegetarians but limit meat consumption to a maximum of five times per month. Their diet comprises at least 90% plant-based foods. The BZ diet includes sources of protein such as fish instead of meat. Fish is an exceptional source of omega-3 FAs, which are beneficial for brain and heart health, as well as reducing inflammation [95,96].” (See page 12, line 1216 – The penultimate paragraph of the section “4.2.4. Polyphenol-Rich Foods”, in the original manuscript).

▪ “The BZ diet also incorporates whole grains, which are high in fiber; vegetables, another excellent source of fiber; legumes such as chickpeas, beans, and peas, which are rich sources of protein and fiber; and colorful fruits and vegetables such as berries and grapes. Foods typical of the Okinawa diet (a BZ in Japan) that are beneficial for health include soy products, turmeric (curcumin), tofu (spermidine), seaweed (astaxanthin), and seafood [95,96].” (See page 12, line 1216 – The last paragraph of the section “4.2.4. Polyphenol-Rich Foods”, in the original manuscript).

 

Comments 3:

Major points: Quality of presentation does not meet the standards of the Journal at this stage. Indeed, there is only one figure in the article, while a review should captivate the interest of the reader also through graphical representations. Figure 1, at the end of the paper, is only a list of bullet points, and the authors should improve this aspect.

Response 3:

Thank you very much for your observation. Two new Figures have been added to the manuscript (Figures 1 and 2), as helpful visual aids for readers. (See page 2, lines 126–127; page 8, lines 839–845).

 

Comments 4:

Minor points: Abstract could be revised and simplified: there are too many abbreviations. Additionally, some sentences are too high-sounding and colloquial (e.g. “nutrition to stay healthy and live long”).

Response 4:

Thank you for your helpful suggestion. The abstract has been revised accordingly. (See page 1, lines 25–32).

 

Comments 5:

Minor points: Introduction, page 2, line 50: “Boron (B) is a prebiotic element essential for life, influencing its origin and evolution. It is crucial for certain bacteria, plants, fungi, and algae” This part is rather generic. Since this is a (focused) review, the author should provide more details and references on this topic. Or, if the authors want to discuss this in the following paragraphs, they should specify it.

Response 5:

Thank you for your thoughtful suggestion regarding the “Introduction” section. Two new paragraphs have been added for a clearer presentation, as follows:

▪ “… In addition, for humans and animals, B has not yet been classified as an essential micronutrient because its biological role has not been clearly identified. It has recently been proposed that indigestible and microbiota-accessible B is essential for healthy symbiosis (HS) between microbes and the human/animal (H/A) host, with a potential role in modulating the microbiota composition [8–10].” (See page 2, lines 100–104).

▪ “Consequently, the concept of “prebiotic” for the B element has two meanings: (i) in the origin and evolution of life, B is the proposed catalyst in the prebiotic chemical synthesis of nucleosides [3,4,11,12] and polypeptides [13,14]; (ii) in nutrition, B is part of the microbiota-accessible indigestible compounds called prebiotics and is a substrate selectively used by the host microorganisms, conferring a health benefit [8–10,15]. Thus, naturally occurring B species are essential for the HS between the microbiome and the H/A host [5,10]. Recent research indicates that B compounds can positively influence the composition of the GM, with potential prebiotic effects [10,15], and it has not yet been experimentally proven that digestible B can physiologically participate in cellular metabolism [9,16].” (See page 2, lines 105–114).

 

Comments 6:

Minor points: On the other hand, I find the paragraph on Mars confusing (page 2, line 97). How is it related to the rest of the work?

Response 6:

Thank you for your valuable suggestion.

The sentence “Associations of B with lower risk of mortality have been found, suggesting a lower risk of cancer and mortality in populations with more B exposure [11,12]” has been removed from the manuscript. (See page 3, line 153).

The aim of our paper has been rephrased (also mentioning prebiotic chemistry), as follows: “Our paper reviews the evidence supporting the essentiality of naturally occurring B species both for prebiotic chemistry and for HS between microbiota and H/A host, highlighting the role of borate–pectic polysaccharides (BPP) and borate–phenolic esters (BPE) as novel prebiotic candidates targeting the colon.” (See page 3, lines 154–157).

 

Comments 7:

Minor points: Conclusion section is very short, and the style is not consistent with the rest of the paper. Maybe some of the information discussed in the section “The Future of Personalized Nutrition” could be moved here.

Response 7:

Thank you for pointing this out.

Some sentences have been removed from Section 5 to “Conclusions” (See page 16, lines 1931–1946):

“The effects of the MABs diet are as follows [8,9]:

(i) Colonic mucus gel rejuvenation with far-reaching effects on the musculoskeletal system (bones, cartilages, muscles) and the immune system (brain, heart, thyroid). The colonic mucus gel rejuvenation has a major meaning in the concept of healthy longevity. The MoA of MABs succeeds in rejuvenating the colonic mucus gel by stimulating BPB, stopping the growth of pathogenic bacteria and strengthening the gel layer of the colonic mucus.

(ii) Reversing DYS through MABs nutrition by reversing an aged microbiome into a younger one and the potential to provide healthy longevity to the aged host by supporting immunity and restoring HS in the GM system. Subsequently, reversing DYS slows aging.

(iii) Essential nutritional adjuvants in antibiotic treatment applied in acute infections: stimulate commensal bacteria, stop the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria, thus regulating the GM during antibiotic treatment.

(iv) Adjunct to periodontal therapy: MABs can be used effectively as an active ingredient in toothpastes and mouthwashes, as well as an adjuvant in the treatment of periodontal diseases (gingivitis and periodontitis).”

A new paragraph has been added to “Conclusions” section, as follows: “The role of this high-MABs food diet is to ensure a HS of the GM with the host and to help the nutritional cocktail to reverse the DYS due to the physiological dysfunctions of aging. The fundamental principle of the MABs diet is that BNDMA should be a minimum of 1 mg of B in stools, which is provided by a minimum of 10 mg of B daily intake of foods. In addition, the MABs diet should provide about 90% of the regulated daily diet of 2000 calories/person and have a low Fe, S and gliadin content, and high omega-3 FAs and polyphenol content. The following categories of foods should be used in the MABs diet, in order of BND: fruits, vegetables, seeds, fermented foods and marine fish and be part of 90% of the daily diet.” (See page 16, lines 1947–1955).

Also, two additional explanatory sentences have been added to Section 5: “Consequently, for a personalized nutrition with B, we will have to define the known concept of ‘nutrient density’. Nutrient density identifies the ratio of beneficial nutrients to calories in food [106].” (See page 13, lines 1544–1546).

 

Editorial Office questions/comments

Comments 1:

During our standard checks of all submissions, we noticed that the similarity report is 26% for your paper, with 9% similarity to a previously published paper. We therefore request that you revise the paper such that the similarity percentage is less than 5% for each source.

Response 1:

Thank you very much for your observation. After the manuscript revision, the similarity report is 22%. For each bibliographic source, the similarity percentage is less than 5%.

 

Comments 2:

We also noticed that there is only 1 figure and 1 table in the manuscript. We recommend adding more figures and tables as these can be helpful visual aids for readers. If you are able to, please do consider adding them.

Response 2:

Thank you for pointing this out. Two new Figures have been added to the manuscript (Figures 1 and 2), as helpful visual aids for readers. (See page 2, lines 126–127; page 8, lines 839–845).

 

Comments 3:

The reviewers indicate that your manuscript may require some improvement to the English. Please review the English and decide whether revisions are necessary. [Note that only minor English editing is included in the article processing charge (APC). Your paper could be returned to you at the English editing stage of the publication process if more than minor editing is required, which could delay the publication of your work].

Response 3:

Thank you for your helpful suggestion. Some grammar, stylistic or spelling errors have been corrected throughout the entire manuscript.

 

We have also introduced other additions/modifications that we hope will improve the quality of the manuscript:

▪ Two new Figures have been added (Figures 1 and 2) and the initial Figure 1 has been renumbered as Figure 3.

▪ Three References from the initial list have been removed during the manuscript revision: Ref. [11] (Kulkarni et al., 2023), Ref. [12] (Stürmer et al., 2024), and Ref. [62] (de Carvalho, 2022).

▪ Nine new References have been added to the revised manuscript: Ref. [10] (Sentürk et al., 2024), Ref. [14] (Franco & da Silva, 2021), Ref. [41] (Funakawa & Miwa, 2015), Ref. [42] (Miller et al., 2016), Ref. [43] (Ali et al., 2024), Ref. [50] (Şahin et al., 2023), Ref. [76] (Al Hasan et al., 2016), Ref. [82] (Yazbeck et al., 2005), and Ref. [106] (Drewnowski & Fulgoni, 2014).

▪ The Reference list has been entirely checked and renumbered accordingly.

▪ All abbreviations have been defined the first time they appear in the text.

▪ Some grammar, stylistic or spelling errors have been corrected.

 

Kind regards,

George Dan MOGOŞANU, PhD

Corresponding Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Report on: Naturally Occurring Microbiota-Accessible Borates: A Focused Minireview

Recommendation: major revision

Q The abstract I think is longer it should be shorter and more precise.

Q keywords are so many only add the man article  

Q Is boron (B) an essential prebiotic element for life, and how does it influence the origin and evolution of living organisms?

Q What significant findings have recent scientific studies on B revealed regarding the symbiosis between commensal microorganisms in the microbiome and the human/animal (H/A) host, particularly in relation to the fact that B is not necessary as a nutrient for human cells? Additionally, could you provide references for each of these statements to help clarify the information for readers?

Q The following natural boron compounds have been identified in plants: (i) BPP complexes, specifically borate–rhamnogalacturonan II (RG-II). However, relevant references were not cited. Please include the following reference: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.113918 along with the most relevant ones.

Q What is the character of caloric restriction and the restriction of certain nutrients that favor pathogenic bacteria?

Q What nutrients should be high in the food consumed for a long and healthy life, such as prebiotic B, omega-3 fatty acids, polyphenols, SCFAs (mainly butyrate), medium-chain fatty acids (mainly caproic acid), and probiotic foods like fermented yogurts, cheese, and pickles, and what are their recommended percentages?

Q Low Sulfur-Containing Foods should explain more details

Q In the section of Low Iron-Containing Foods, What are some low iron-containing foods, and how does maintaining optimal levels of iron in the blood contribute to overall health and longevity?

Does the study suggest that communities with high levels of B in drinking water have a higher birth rate compared to the general population of France?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

no issue 

Author Response

Naturally Occurring Microbiota-Accessible Borates: A Focused Minireview

Manuscript ID: inorganics-3283169

 

Dear Reviewer,

First of all, we would like to address you many thanks for your accurate observations and valuable comments. We used all these and improved the paper accordingly.

All changes in the revised manuscript were marked up using the “Track Changes” function.

The following changes have been made for the Manuscript (ID: inorganics-3283169):

 

Reviewer #2 questions/comments

Comments 1:

Q The abstract I think is longer it should be shorter and more precise.

Response 1:

Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The abstract has been revised accordingly. (See page 1, lines 25–32).

 

Comments 2:

Q Keywords are so many only add the man article.

Response 2:

Thank you very much for your observation. The keywords list has been revised accordingly. (See page 1, lines 34–35).

 

Comments 3:

Q Is boron (B) an essential prebiotic element for life, and how does it influence the origin and evolution of living organisms?

Response 3:

Thank you for pointing this out. Two new paragraphs have been added for a clearer presentation, as follows:

▪ “… In addition, for humans and animals, B has not yet been classified as an essential micronutrient because its biological role has not been clearly identified. It has recently been proposed that indigestible and microbiota-accessible B is essential for healthy symbiosis (HS) between microbes and the human/animal (H/A) host, with a potential role in modulating the microbiota composition [8–10].” (See page 2, lines 100–104).

▪ “Consequently, the concept of “prebiotic” for the B element has two meanings: (i) in the origin and evolution of life, B is the proposed catalyst in the prebiotic chemical synthesis of nucleosides [3,4,11,12] and polypeptides [13,14]; (ii) in nutrition, B is part of the microbiota-accessible indigestible compounds called prebiotics and is a substrate selectively used by the host microorganisms, conferring a health benefit [8–10,15]. Thus, naturally occurring B species are essential for the HS between the microbiome and the H/A host [5,10].” (See page 2, lines 105–111).

 

Comments 4:

Q What significant findings have recent scientific studies on B revealed regarding the symbiosis between commensal microorganisms in the microbiome and the human/animal (H/A) host, particularly in relation to the fact that B is not necessary as a nutrient for human cells? Additionally, could you provide references for each of these statements to help clarify the information for readers?

Response 4:

Thank you for your insightful comment. A new sentence has been added to “Introduction” section, as follows: “… Recent research indicates that B compounds can positively influence the composition of the GM, with potential prebiotic effects [10,15], and it has not yet been experimentally proven that digestible B can physiologically participate in cellular metabolism [9,16].” (See page 2, lines 111–114).

 

Comments 5:

Q The following natural boron compounds have been identified in plants: (i) BPP complexes, specifically borate–rhamnogalacturonan II (RG-II). However, relevant references were not cited. Please include the following reference: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.113918 along with the most relevant ones.

Response 5:

Thank you very much for your observation. Three new References (See page 5, line 381) have been added in the second paragraph of Section “2.2. Biological Life”, as follows:

[41] Funakawa, H.; Miwa, K. Synthesis of borate cross-linked rhamnogalacturonan II. Front. Plant. Sci. 2015, 6, 223. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00223. (See page 18, lines 2102–2103).

[42] Miller, E.P.; Wu, Y.; Carrano, C.J. Boron uptake, localization, and speciation in marine brown algae. Metallomics 2016, 8, 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5mt00238a. (See page 18, lines 2104–2105).

[43] Ali, I.; Ali, A.; Guo, L.; Burki, S.; Rehman, J.U.; Fazal, M.; Ahmad, N.; Khan, S.; Toloza, C.A.T.; Shah, M.R. Synthesis of calix (4) resorcinarene based amphiphilic macrocycle as an efficient nanocarrier for Amphotericin-B to enhance its oral bioavailability. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2024, 238, 113918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.113918. (See page 18, lines 2106–2108).

 

Comments 6:

Q What is the character of caloric restriction and the restriction of certain nutrients that favor pathogenic bacteria?

Response 6:

Thank you for your helpful suggestion. The wording “… is becoming dominant at the scientific level [62], having both the character of caloric restriction and restriction…” has been removed from the manuscript and the paragraph has been rephrased as follows: “Recently, dietary restriction of some nutrients (sulfur and iron) that favor pathogenic bacteria, relate to the following nutrient categories: (i) nutrients that require dietary restriction for a healthy and long life, such as S, Fe and gluten; (ii) nutrients that need to be high in the food consumed for a long and healthy life, such as prebiotic B, omega-3 FAs, polyphenols, SCFAs (mainly BUT), medium-chain fatty acids (MCFAs; mainly caproic acid) and probiotic foods obtained by fermentation (yoghurts, cheese, pickles).” (See page 8, lines 861–866).

 

Comments 7:

Q What nutrients should be high in the food consumed for a long and healthy life, such as prebiotic B, omega-3 fatty acids, polyphenols, SCFAs (mainly butyrate), medium-chain fatty acids (mainly caproic acid), and probiotic foods like fermented yogurts, cheese, and pickles, and what are their recommended percentages?

Response 7:

Thank you very much for bringing this to our attention. A new paragraph has been added to Section 5, as follows: “The fundamental principle of the MABs diet is that the density of digestible microbiota B should be a minimum of 1 mg of B in stools, which is provided by a minimum of 10 mg of B intake daily. In addition, the MABs diet should provide about 90% of the regular daily diet of 2000 calories/person and have a low Fe, S and gliadin content, and high omega-3 FAs and polyphenol content. The following categories of foods should be used in the MABs diet, in order of BND: fruits and vegetables (50%), seeds (10%), fermented foods (20%), marine fish (10%) and be part of 90% of the daily diet. This is an edible MABs diet comprising high B foods with low levels of S, Fe and gliadins that can provide B intakes of 10 mg/day to a maximum of 20 mg/day and a B level in stool of minimum 1 mg/day.” (See page 14, lines 1624–1633).

 

Comments 8:

Q Low Sulfur-Containing Foods should explain more details.

Response 8:

Thank you very much for your suggestion. A new paragraph has been added to Section “4.1.1. Low Sulfur-Containing Foods”, as follows: “S is present in foods rich in the methionine and cysteine amino acids, including beef, lamb, pork and poultry meat, unfermented cow’s milk. Also, foods preserved with sulfites should be reduced in the diet. Vegetables and fruits such as bell pepper, carrot, spinach, zucchini, cucumber, lettuce, tomato, banana, watermelon, apple, kiwi, melon, berries, oranges, pineapple, and cereals such as rice, quinoa, oats have low S and high B content.” (See page 9, lines 913–917).

 

Comments 9:

Q In the section of Low Iron-Containing Foods, what are some low iron-containing foods, and how does maintaining optimal levels of iron in the blood contribute to overall health and longevity?

Response 9:

Thank you for pointing this out. A new paragraph has been added to Section “4.1.2. Low Iron-Containing Foods”, as follows: “There are two main forms of Fe: heme and non-heme. Plant-based foods, as well as Fe dietary supplements, usually contain non-heme Fe. Meat and seafood contain both heme and non-heme Fe. Heme Fe tends to be absorbed by the human body at a higher level. Legumes, whole grains, nuts, and seeds all contain phytic acid, which has been shown to inhibit the absorption of non-heme Fe. Soy protein and calcium can also affect Fe absorption. Also, polyphenolic compounds found in coffee, black tea, and herbal infusions can also inhibit the absorption of non-heme Fe [76].” (See page 9, lines 937–943).

 

Comments 10:

Q Does the study suggest that communities with high levels of B in drinking water have a higher birth rate compared to the general population of France?

Response 10:

Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The wording “… in a study that specifically examined the toxicity of B on the population, the birth rate in communities with high B level in drinking water was higher than that of the general population of France as a reference area [57]” has been removed from the manuscript and the paragraph has been rephrased as follows: “Also, from another point of view, in a study that specifically examined the toxicity of B on the population, the mortality rate in communities with a high amount of B in drinking water was lower than that of the general population of France, as a reference area (p<10^–3). The results of this study do not support the idea of a harmful effect of B level of water on human health, in this specific region. There is even a trend toward a beneficial effect following exposure to low doses of environmental B (less than 1 mg/L B in drinking water) [82].” (See page 10, lines 1012–1018).

 

 

Editorial Office questions/comments

Comments 1:

During our standard checks of all submissions, we noticed that the similarity report is 26% for your paper, with 9% similarity to a previously published paper. We therefore request that you revise the paper such that the similarity percentage is less than 5% for each source.

Response 1:

Thank you very much for your observation. After the manuscript revision, the similarity report is 22%. For each bibliographic source, the similarity percentage is less than 5%.

 

Comments 2:

We also noticed that there is only 1 figure and 1 table in the manuscript. We recommend adding more figures and tables as these can be helpful visual aids for readers. If you are able to, please do consider adding them.

Response 2:

Thank you for pointing this out. Two new Figures have been added to the manuscript (Figures 1 and 2), as helpful visual aids for readers. (See page 2, lines 126–127; page 8, lines 839–845).

 

Comments 3:

The reviewers indicate that your manuscript may require some improvement to the English. Please review the English and decide whether revisions are necessary. [Note that only minor English editing is included in the article processing charge (APC). Your paper could be returned to you at the English editing stage of the publication process if more than minor editing is required, which could delay the publication of your work].

Response 3:

Thank you for your helpful suggestion. Some grammar, stylistic or spelling errors have been corrected throughout the entire manuscript.

 

We have also introduced other additions/modifications that we hope will improve the quality of the manuscript:

▪ Two new Figures have been added (Figures 1 and 2) and the initial Figure 1 has been renumbered as Figure 3.

▪ Three References from the initial list have been removed during the manuscript revision: Ref. [11] (Kulkarni et al., 2023), Ref. [12] (Stürmer et al., 2024), and Ref. [62] (de Carvalho, 2022).

▪ Nine new References have been added to the revised manuscript: Ref. [10] (Sentürk et al., 2024), Ref. [14] (Franco & da Silva, 2021), Ref. [41] (Funakawa & Miwa, 2015), Ref. [42] (Miller et al., 2016), Ref. [43] (Ali et al., 2024), Ref. [50] (Şahin et al., 2023), Ref. [76] (Al Hasan et al., 2016), Ref. [82] (Yazbeck et al., 2005), and Ref. [106] (Drewnowski & Fulgoni, 2014).

▪ The Reference list has been entirely checked and renumbered accordingly.

▪ All abbreviations have been defined the first time they appear in the text.

▪ Some grammar, stylistic or spelling errors have been corrected.

 

Kind regards,

George Dan MOGOŞANU, PhD

Corresponding Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors addressed the points raised. I still suggest to improve figures. For example, Fig.3 should be revised: it is a table rather than a figure.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

First of all, we would like to address you many thanks for your accurate observations and valuable comments. We used all these and improved the paper accordingly.

All changes in the revised manuscript were marked up using the “Track Changes” function.

The following changes have been made for the Manuscript (ID: inorganics-3283169):

 

Reviewer #1 questions/comments

Comments 1:

The authors addressed the points raised. I still suggest to improve figures. For example, Fig.3 should be revised: it is a table rather than a figure.

Response 1:

Thank you very much for your comments, who helped us to improve the quality of our manuscript. Figure 3 has been revised accordingly. (See page 13, line 1541).

 

Kind regards,

George Dan MOGOŞANU, PhD

Corresponding Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

can be accepted in the current form 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

First of all, we would like to address you many thanks for your accurate observations and valuable comments. We used all these and improved the paper accordingly.

 

Reviewer #2 questions/comments

Comments 1:

Can be accepted in the current form.

Response 1:

Thank you very much for your favorable answer and for your comments, who helped us to improve the quality of our manuscript.

 

Kind regards,

George Dan MOGOŞANU, PhD

Corresponding Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf