Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In reviewing the paper titled 'Elucidating the Effect of Increased Magnetic Field Exposure on Microalgae Chlorella Vulgaris Growth and Bioactive Compound Production evaluated the exposure of this green microalgae to 500 µT on growth, protein and beta carotene content.

I have identified several areas that require further clarification and detail in the final manuscript.

The results are presented but not thoroughly explained, and it do not fully align with the comprehensive approach suggested by the title “Elucidating…”.

How do the authors explain the correlation between the chosen intensity/time exposure and the results obtained?

What was the rationale behind selecting the specific intensity and exposure times used in this study?

The abstract mentions 'production of biomaterials,' yet the study focuses on protein and beta-carotene, which are typically not classified as biomaterials. Could this discrepancy be clarified?

Could the authors elaborate on why only protein and beta-carotene contents were evaluated, considering the wide range of bioactive compounds in microalgae?

Typically, microalgae growth is presented as biomass concentration (g/L) over time. Could the authors provide such a standard growth curve for Chlorella vulgaris? Data from optical density measurements alone do not adequately represent the growth patterns.

Addressing these aspects would greatly strengthen the manuscript and better justify its title and findings.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers:

We would like to express sincere gratitude to the reviewers for taking the time to go through the manuscript and provide their feedback. As per your feedback and to the best of our ability, we have thoroughly revised this version of the manuscript and re-submitting it for dissemination in your esteemed journal. We sincerely appreciate your time and willingness to review our work for the second time and provide your feedback.

Our response to each of your concern is attached for your kind consideration.

Sincerely,
Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, the authors reported magnetic field exposure on microalgae chlorella vulgaris growth and bioactive compound production. This work seems to be useful for this field. However, the following problems should be addressed before further consideration of publication:

1. The abstract should be revised to be brief, and the development and novelty of this work can be stated.

2. All the figures need to be revised with consistent layout and style to improve the readability. Some inset words and also additional notes are not easy to read.

3. In the Introduction, references should be enriched. The advantages and related advances of microalgae fabrication and applications should be added including: 10.1002/sstr.202200356, 10.1007/s10811-023-02994-1, 10.1021/acsami.1c16859.

4. Considering the magnetic exposure, aeration and other culture conditions should be stated in detail in the manuscript.

5. The magnetic strength and uniformity distribution inside the Helmholtz coils should be tested in the manuscript. How about spatial directions of the magnetic fields?

6. Typical optical images and morphological characterizations of chlorella under various treatment can be added.

7. The authors are suggested to add theoretic analysis and explanations in this case. The depth could also be improved if the authors provided some insights of biological and micro/nano interactions responsible for magnetic field exposure on microalgae growth.

8. The reference format should be checked considering some errors.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers:

We would like to express sincere gratitude to the reviewers for taking the time to go through the manuscript and provide their feedback. As per your feedback and to the best of our ability, we have thoroughly revised this version of the manuscript and re-submitting it for dissemination in your esteemed journal. We sincerely appreciate your time and willingness to review our work for the second time and provide your feedback.

Our response to each of your concern is attached for your kind consideration.

Sincerely,
Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The suggested corrections have been implemented. I accept the manuscript in its current form for publication.

Author Response

Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All the revisions have been checked.

Author Response

Thank you.