Carica papaya Crude Extracts Are an Efficient Source of Environmentally Friendly Biogenic Synthesizers of Silver Nanoparticles

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We have made all suggested changes in the latest version of the manuscript. The changes that are made have been highlighted yellow. All of the comments have been copied in the responses file and responded point-by point. Hopefully the responses will satisfy your queries. Thanks

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript deals with the Carica papaya-mediated biogenic synthesis of silver nanoparticles and the evaluation of their antibacterial and antifungal activity. The writing and language of the manuscript are satisfactory. However, there is a lack of novelty in this work as there is already several earlier literatures available. Moreover, the study is also lacking in the proper synthesis and characterization of nanoparticles. There is also a need to perform other experiments to study the antimicrobial activity of synthesized nanoparticles. Overall, I did not find the article suitable for publication in its current form.

1.     There are several studies present on Carica papaya-based synthesis of silver nanoparticles and estimation of antimicrobial properties. Then, what is the novelty of this study?

For example, Doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2023.1301-1311

                        Doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.01.007

2.     The authors should improve the title of the manuscript as it mainly contains biogenic synthesis of silver nanoparticles and evaluation of antibacterial activity. So, I suggest using the term ‘biogenic synthesis’ in the title.

3.     Authors should revise the abstract by considering the following points:

·       The authors need not to discuss the methodology. (L 14-15); (L17-19)

·       Represent some values of antimicrobial activity and for which strain it shows the most

4.      Authors should try for a better SEM micrograph by taking less sample concentration. At present, the shape and size of nanoparticles are not clear from the SEM micrograph. Authors should further optimize the synthesis process by taking more ratios to obtain a better uniform nanoparticle.

5.     Authors should conduct DLS, XRD, FTIR, HR-TEM, and XPS analysis to characterize the nanoparticles properly.

6.     In EDX spectra, a clear peak of Cl and other unlabelled peaks are present; why so? Have the authors considered them while calculating the weight percentage?  

 

7.     For antimicrobial activity, authors have only used plate plate-based clear zone method. Authors should also represent the results through the table in mm/++ form. Authors should also study the in vitro time kill study and determine the MIC values for the studied microorganism.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We have made all suggested changes in the latest version of the manuscript. The changes that are made have been highlighted yellow. All of the comments have been copied in the responses file and responded point-by point. Hopefully the responses will satisfy your queries. Thanks

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I reviewed the manuscript entitled "Carica papaya crude extracts can effectively control lab 2 contaminants through silver nanoparticles synthesized in 3 environment-friendly way".  The manuscript has a lot of information. The manuscript needs some correction before it can be published. I suggest authors take a closer look and adjust the write up to be more precise and appealing to the readers.

Abstract

1-Please improved the abstract. The abstract should have one sentence per each: context and background, motivation, hypothesis, methods, results, conclusions.

2-At the beginning of the abstract section, the authors should add 1-2 sentences about the reason for paying attention to the subject.

3- The results of microbial growth should be expressed numerically.

4. mg/L, the letter L, which represents liter, should be written in capital letters in all texts.

4- At the end of the abstract section, the conclusion of the work should be stated in one sentence.

 

Keywords

1-Usually, keywords are not used in the title of the article.

 

Main text

1-In the first paragraph of the introduction section, the importance of the topic should be stated.

-2 Regarding Garcia Papaya, give economic information such as the amount of production, consumption and use.

2-The spacing between words is not correct in some places. Please correct it.

3. There is no research background.

4-In the last paragraph of the introduction section, the purpose of presenting the article and its innovation are written clearly. But here most of the way of doing the work is explained. Please correct it.

5-Where and with what concentration is silver nitrate solution prepared?

6-The text of the article is very well written.

7-The quality of the figures is very good.

8-Why has the effect of environmental conditions such as pH not been investigated? What was the pH of the solution during the experiment?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We have made all suggested changes in the latest version of the manuscript. The changes that are made have been highlighted yellow. All of the comments have been copied in the responses file and responded point-by point. Hopefully the responses will satisfy your queries. Thanks

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled “Carica papaya crude extracts can effectively control lab contaminants through biogenic synthesis of silver nanoparticles in environment-friendly way” is written in an organized manner and the authors need to revise a little bit for further proceeding. Minor revision of the manuscript is required. The following suggestions may be included in the revision process.

1.     Rephrase the title.

2.      The microbial plates are not clearly/completely swabbed and the mentioning in the images (A,B,C….etc) are collapsed, try to rearrange and group the images.

Conclusively, I recommend this paper for further proceeding and for peer review.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The comments by the reviewer have been copied and responded one by one in the attached file. The changes have been highlighted yellow in the text.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors must carefully arrange fig in the manuscript to properly review the revised version of the manuscript. Arrange the Fig. 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, and 19 by using top bottom option while pasting the fig. Cross-check the manuscript before submitting it.  

Also, HR-TEM and DLS analysis for proper characterization of nanoparticles is required, which was asked in the pervious version but is not provided in this revised version. 

Authors should also study the in vitro time kill study and determine the MIC values for the studied microorganism

Moreover, authors should also provide point wise response to reviewers comments.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing required

Author Response

The comments by the reviewer have been copied and responded one by one in the attached file. The changes have been highlighted yellow in the text. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper can be accepted 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Accepted.