Phenolic Secondary Metabolites and Antiradical and Antibacterial Activities of Different Extracts of Usnea barbata (L.) Weber ex F.H.Wigg from Călimani Mountains, Romania
, Laura Bucur 2,*, Cerasela Elena Gîrd 3,*, Antoanela Popescu 2,†, Elena Matei 4,†, Georgeta Camelia Cozaru 4,5,†, Verginica Schröder 6,*, Emma Adriana Ozon 7,*, Ancuța Cătălina Fița 7,*, Dumitru Lupuliasa 7,‡, Mariana Aschie 4,5,‡, Aureliana Caraiane 8,‡, Mihaela Botnarciuc 9,‡ and Victoria Badea 1,‡
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Interesting manuscript, authors should rethink the introduction part, much information can be moved to the discussion section. Did the authors consider cytotoxicity analysis of the extracts?
Author Response
Please, see the attachment!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The work of Popovici and coworkers evaluates the properties of acetone, ethanol and aqueous extracts from Usnea barbata obtained by two different extraction methods. Antioxidant and antimicrobial properties were determined.
However, the main and most significant element in the paper that qualifies for improvement is the introduction and discussion.
The discussion and the introduction need to be significantly rewritten - the introduction is too long, some elements could be moved to the discussion. The discussion itself contains unnecessary descriptions of results, which should be placed in the results chapter. Thus all the graphs and figures should be moved to the chapter above. The discussion would need to be re-written to allow comparison of results from the selected topic and their evaluation.
In subsection 2.5 there is an error in the numbering of the table
Line 182, 183 - dots
Author Response
Please, see the attachment!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In the manuscript entitled “Phenolic Secondary Metabolites and Antiradical and Antibacterial Activities of Different Extracts of Usnea barbata (L.) Weber ex F.H.Wigg from Călimani Mountains, Romania” the authors investigated phenolic constituents and bioactivities of Usnea barbata extracts. They demonstrated the impact of extraction conditions on the bioactivity of the extracts. The manuscript is well written and is easy to follow.
There are some minor issues that should be fixed:
Throughout the text change “bacteria inoculum” to “bacterial inoculum”.
Lines 48-49: Rewrite the sentence.
Line 121: Authors should add following citations:
- Molecules 2020, 25, 2947.
- Plants, 2020, 9(12), 1680. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9121680
Lines 146-156: Shorten this paragraph as it contains the full description of the article including the results and repeats the abstract.
Line 256: Change to “Table 4”, instead of “Table 2”.
Line 273: Change the table so that the values are all on the same line, as it is difficult to keep track of where something belongs.
Line 371: Change from “1;10” to “1:10”.
Line 380: Change U. barbata to italic.
Line 380: “In”, instead of “un”.
Author Response
Please, see the attachment!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript has been revised
