Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

The review seems correct to me. It is well structured and easy to understand. As an expert in PHB, I miss any reference to blends with caprolactone or the use of  inorganic nanocomposites, such as hallosyte nanotubes. If references to these compounds could be incorporated, it would seem perfect to me.

Author Response

2022-06-28

Response to Reviewer1

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you so much for your high evaluation of our contribution. Let me confirm, that we took seriously you comment - “…I miss any reference to blends with caprolactone or the use of  inorganic nanocomposites, such as hallosyte nanotubes. If references to these compounds could be incorporated, it would seem perfect to me.” – and included the most applicable of them. Please let us know if we can do something else to lift the quality of our submission

Regards

Dr Alex Vetcher

Reviewer 2 Report

 

The review “Modulating essential properties of Polyhydroxyalkanoates via composite variation” concerns the recent literature of polyhydroxyalkanoates blends and composite materials. The subject is certainly up to date because polyhydroxyalkanoates, which are both biodegradable and biobased polymers, can play a key role in solving the urgent problem of plastic pollution. Their association with other molecules in blends and composites widens the range of their possible uses.

I found the text very difficult to read, not only for typesetting mistakes and language issues. Many sentences are obscure and require the check of the mentioned original paper. The section on 2.4.2 on electrical properties is probably the most problematic, but the whole manuscript requires amelioration.

The title is not fully coherent with the content, since it exclusively mentions composites overlooking the blends. I suggest to change it, making it more appealing, e.g. into “Polyhydroxyalkanoates composites and blends: improved properties and new applications”

I would find useful to include a recent review on pure polyhydroxyalkanoates. The one entitled “What Has Been Trending in the Research of Polyhydroxyalkanoates? A Systematic Review” by M. Guzik et al. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2020, 8, https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00959, in my opinion, is well written and is a good model to be inspired.

Issues are present also in the list of references, starting with reference 1 where Journal title, volume and page are missing.

As an overall, I suggest to fully rewrite the text in order to improve its readability, to make it accurate and more informative.

Author Response

2022-06-28

Response to Reviewer2

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you so much for your efforts to make our submission as good as we can. From our side we tried to address all your comments (see below): 

Comment	Response
I found the text very difficult to read, not only for typesetting mistakes and language issues. Many sentences are obscure and require the check of the mentioned original paper. The section on 2.4.2 on electrical properties is probably the most problematic, but the whole manuscript requires amelioration.	The mentioned section was fully revised.
The title is not fully coherent with the content, since it exclusively mentions composites overlooking the blends. I suggest to change it, making it more appealing, e.g. into “Polyhydroxyalkanoates composites and blends: improved properties and new applications”	Done
I would find useful to include a recent review on pure polyhydroxyalkanoates. The one entitled “What Has Been Trending in the Research of Polyhydroxyalkanoates? A Systematic Review” by M. Guzik et al. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 2020, 8, https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00959, in my opinion, is well written and is a good model to be inspired.	Thanks for your suggestion. The review is very useful. We included it.
Issues are present also in the list of references, starting with reference 1 where Journal title, volume and page are missing.	Corrected
As an overall, I suggest to fully rewrite the text in order to improve its readability, to make it accurate and more informative.	Some adjustments were made to improve readability and comprehension

 

Regards

Dr. Alex Vetcher

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The corrections improved the manuscript, nevertheless style is still far from perfection.