Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Sodium Alginate: A Green Biopolymer Resource-Based Antimicrobial Edible Coating to Enhance Fruit Shelf-Life: A Review
Previous Article in Journal
Gel Polymer Electrolytes with High Thermal Stability for Safe Lithium Metal Batteries
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impact of Carrageenan-Based Encapsulation on the Physicochemical, Structural, and Antioxidant Properties of Freshwater Snail (Bellamya bengalensis) Protein Hydrolysates
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Preparation of Colloidal Silver Triangular Nanoplates and Their Application in SERS Detection of Trace Levels of Antibiotic Enrofloxacin

Colloids Interfaces 2025, 9(3), 31; https://doi.org/10.3390/colloids9030031
by Cao Tuan Anh 1, Dao Tran Cao 2,3 and Luong Truc-Quynh Ngan 2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Colloids Interfaces 2025, 9(3), 31; https://doi.org/10.3390/colloids9030031
Submission received: 2 April 2025 / Revised: 12 May 2025 / Accepted: 14 May 2025 / Published: 16 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Food Colloids: 3rd Edition)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper discussed the synthesis of silver triangular nanoplates designed for use as SERS substrates for the detection of enrofloxacin. The study tackled the foundation in terms of evaluating the substrate in its capability of detecting target analytes. All necessary information has been provided but I have the following questions/suggestions:

1. As with the limit of detection, it was stated that it was found to be 10-13 M. Although the spectra of R6G at varying concentrations were provided, I suggest that it is better to also include spectra at concentrations lower than 10-13 M just to show that 10-13 M is indeed the lowest concentration in which signals are still detectable.

2. I also suggest that you make a table of the characteristic peak assignments with the corresponding reference(s) as it is more organized and easier to look up than finding for the assignments in the main text.

3. I would also like to ask why the peak at 1390 cm-1 was chosen as the reference peak in coming up with the regression equation? I think it is better to include a brief explanation in the manuscript with the reason why this peak was chosen. Likewise, why was the peak at 1511 cm-1 was chosen in the calculation of the EF? Most of published works choose the peak at 1361 cm-1 in the calculation of the EF so I'm curious to know why you chose 1511 cm-1.

My suggestions are only minor and considering these suggestions and addressing my questions can somehow improve the content of the manuscript. Overall, the article was straightforward and easy to understand and there is no need for any major revisions.

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for your thoughtful and constructive comments, which have greatly helped us improve the clarity, depth, and rigor of our work.
A detailed response to each of the reviewer’s comments has been provided in the attached file, which also includes supporting images for clarity.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The comments are listed in the attachment file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for your thoughtful and constructive comments, which have greatly helped us improve the clarity, depth, and rigor of our work.
A detailed response to each of the reviewer’s comments has been provided in the attached file, which also includes supporting images for clarity.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

accept

Author Response

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to the reviewer for their kind acceptance and valuable feedback.

On behalf of all the authors,
Luong Truc-Quynh Ngan

Back to TopTop