Influence of the Physico-Chemical Properties of Model Compounds on the Mean Sizes and Retention Rate of Gliadin Nanoparticles
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
See attached report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In this article, the author mentioned that Vegetal proteins have emerged as appealing starting materials for the development of various drug delivery systems, and their use for obtaining polymeric nanoparticles has been profitably exploited in multidisciplinary fields.In the author’s research, four model compounds characterized by different logP values were encapsulated in gliadin nanoparticles, with the aim of investigating the influence of their physico-chemical properties on the cargo features and technological characteristics of the protein nanocarriers. In order to gain information concerning the most suitable physico-chemical features that a compound should possess for entrapment within the gliadin nanosystems, four model molecules characterized by different degrees of hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity were investigated as cargo derivatives. In the experimental study, the author chooses the two characteristics of the entrapment efficiency (%) (EE%) and the loading capacity (%) (LC%) to screen out compounds with better effects. The findings provided in this study demonstrate that the physico-chemical properties of a molecule dramatically influence its retention rate within gliadin nanoparticles as well as the sizing of the resulting systems. The experimental design and data are clear, and the experimental method is novel. Therefore, I recommend to minor revision before the publication. In addition, there are some problems in the details, mainly as follows:
1.“In this investigation, four model compounds characterized by different logP values were encapsulated in gliadin nanoparticles, with the aim of investigating the influence of their physico-chemical properties on the cargo features and technological characteristics of the protein nanocarriers”. In this sentence, the author mentions logP, but does not point out what logP is. If it is a proper noun and it is the first time it appears, don’t use abbreviations.(page1,line15)
2.Is there a problem with the typesetting format? There are a few spaces in the first sentence of the paragraph.(page2,line68)
3.In figure1, the author shows the chemical structure of four different model drugs, and the corresponding chemical formula should be marked next to the chemical structure in each figure.(page3,line92)
4.“Namely, 1 mg/mL of proteins and 0.1% w/v of SRO2 were sol-ubilized in 3 mL of a hydroalcoholic solution (Et:H2O 7:3 v/v, pH 10), and then 5 mL of MilliQ water were added to this suspension”.In this sentence, the author introduced the Preparation of gliadin-based nanoparticles containing model compounds. In the preparation method, the author said to mix the protein with the corresponding solution, but did not indicate which protein it is. If it is a specific protein, the author should indicate the name of the protein.(page3,line101)
5.In figure2, the author showed Entrapment efficiency (EE%) of gliadin nanoparticles prepared with 1 mg/mL of protein and 0.1% w/v of SRO2 as a function of the amount of model compounds added during the preparation of the samples. The author of the figures in figure2 should explain in more detail below the figure, if necessary, give each figure a number, and explain the meaning of the vertical and horizontal coordinates.(page7,line218,219)
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript has been revised and modified satisfactorily by the authors and can be published in its present form.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is the second review of the manuscript. After reviewing, I think the questions have been well answered. And suggest to accept this article for publication.
