A Review of the Patentability of Rosemary-Derived Drugs and Bioactive Compounds
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please see attached a few recommendations for the authors
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Comment No. 1: Please include some general info about the main “active ingredients” in rosemary extracts (indicative text/References below).
Response 1: We appreciate the recommendations, and, as suggested, further sentences have been added throughout the introduction (Page 2, lines 56–58) in order to make the article more robust and substantiated.
Comment No. 2: Lines 34-36: I would add to the listed health effects, the protective action against types of cancer and cardiovascular diseases (+add a Reference/info can be found in the recent review article).
Response 2: We appreciate the recommendations, and as suggested, a sentence has been added to the introduction (Page 1, lines 34–36) in order to make the text more relevant.
Comment No. 3: Of relevant for patenting of natural extracts is the information on any relevant legislation....I would add in the introduction something like the following.
Response 3: We appreciate the recommendations, and, as suggested, examples of relevant legislation have been added throughout the introduction (Page 2, lines 58-67) in order to make the article more robust and substantiated.
Comment No. 4: Conclusions: It would be helpful for the reader to give here in bullet points some a summary of the most important figures (e.g. granted versus applied patents/patents relevant to medicinal produces or processes or others?)
Response 4: We thank you for your suggestion, and as instructed, the conclusion section has been modified and rewritten in order to make the manuscript more fluid and interesting for the readers' understanding.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
The paper I received for review was of great interest to me. It is a very interesting statistical analysis. Also, I was curious about point 4. - Relevant patents on rosemary-derived drugs and bioactive compounds.
My comments are really very minor and only concern the nomenclature of the plant substance. Firstly, please use the author's affiliation of the species in the text - at least once. Secondly, in Figures 1 and 3 an error has crept in - probably due to the use of a full stop - the second part of the species name is written with a capital letter.
I apologise for my purism, but I believe that scientific papers must not contain such errors, as such errors are reproduced by others, and our role is to educate properly.
I wish you all the best.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Comment No. 1: Firstly, please use the author's affiliation of the species in the text - at least once.
Response 1: We thank the reviewer for their recommendations, and, as suggested, the information has been added to the introduction (Page 1, lines 37–40) in order to make the text more relevant.
Comment No. 2: Secondly, in Figures 1 and 3 an error has crept in - probably due to the use of a full stop - the second part of the species name is written with a capital letter.
Response 2: We apologize for the mistakes, and as suggested, the manuscript has been revised. The second part of the species name is now written with a lowercase letter in order to make the manuscript more relevant and clearer for the readers.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
No more comments. The manuscript improved in quality and content my considering the reviewer's comments
