Photosensitive Hybrid Nanostructured Materials: The Big Challenges for Sunlight Capture
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This review focuses on discussing different kinds of hybrid nanostructures for photocatalytic water splitting and CO2 reduction, and degradation of dyes. The authors should think how to present newly with more information in such a way that authors should read and refer this review in their works. I have to say that there are already a large number of reviews on this topic. Since the research toward this direction is still one of the hot field, it might be worth to publish this. However, I would suggest to add more discussion on future perspectives as per the title, the review should be more focused on future challenges.
Comments:
It would be meaningful to provide summary tables in different sections, from which the readers can take look at different literature and if possible efficiencies altogether. There is no discussion about efficiencies in each case, this discussion might be useful to drive the future research Few very relevant papers are missing in the discussion including "Rsc Advances 2015, 5 (37), 29076-29097". What about Z-schemes? no section regarding this.
Author Response
This review focuses on discussing different kinds of hybrid nanostructures for photocatalytic water splitting and CO2 reduction, and degradation of dyes. The authors should think how to present newly with more information in such a way that authors should read and refer this review in their works. I have to say that there are already a large number of reviews on this topic. Since the research toward this direction is still one of the hot field, it might be worth to publish this. However, I would suggest to add more discussion on future perspectives as per the title, the review should be more focused on future challenges.
We thank the reviewer for her/his comments. We have modified the review following the suggestions, also improving the discussion.
It would be meaningful to provide summary tables in different sections, from which the readers can take look at different literature and if possible efficiencies altogether. There is no discussion about efficiencies in each case, this discussion might be useful to drive the future research. Few very relevant papers are missing in the discussion including "Rsc Advances 2015, 5 (37), 29076-29097". What about Z-schemes? no section regarding this.
We thank the reviewer for her/his comments. We agree with her/him and we have added a summarizing table for each section of the revised review, showing a schematic description of the main properties (i.e. chemical nature, synthetic approaches, technological applications) and results (i.e. photo efficiency) of the most important hybrid materials described in the review and concerning the most recent papers in the field. Other references have been added, also including the interesting paper suggested by the referee. Finally, a new section concerning the Z-scheme photocatalysts have been added in the revised version to furnish a more complete vision of the most recently studied photosensitive materials.
We hope that they could favor a more clear and of the recent developments in the photosensitive hybrid nanostructured materials.
Reviewer 2 Report
Review of manuscript number Catalysts_681215
Title: Photosensitive hybrid nanostructured materials: the big challenges for sunlight catching
The manuscript present review of in the field of hybrid nanostructured materials for efficient sunlight capture and solar energy harnessing. Authors based on the literature date, as well as most of the figures. The subject is important and worth to study, but the discussion should be improved. In my opinion the manuscript is worth to publish in Catalysts after minor revision. However, the issues presented below should be taken into account.
There are no detailed descriptions on the advantage and/or disadvantage of this method in comparison with other methods used. It is important to present no only literature results but also examine the latest publications’ strengths and weaknesses. The publication lacks a quantitative comparison of the proposed solutions, e.g. the catalytic activity, degradation efficiency, etc. This is very important, especially considering their possible application currently/in the future. Although these are Figures (Figures: 1, 8, 13, 17, 20; Scheme 2) from other publications (reprinted with permission), their quality must be improved. In Table 1 there are no references. In Figure 3 reaction is not balanced. Hydrogens are missing on the right.Author Response
The manuscript present review of in the field of hybrid nanostructured materials for efficient sunlight capture and solar energy harnessing. Authors based on the literature date, as well as most of the figures. The subject is important and worth to study, but the discussion should be improved. In my opinion the manuscript is worth to publish in Catalysts after minor revision. However, the issues presented below should be taken into account.
We thank the reviewer for her/his comments. In the revised version, we have improved the discussion about the main aspects of each section, in order to underly the fundamentals aspects of all the approaches used to design and prepare photosensitive hybrid nanostructured materials.
There are no detailed descriptions on the advantage and/or disadvantage of this method in comparison with other methods used. It is important to present no only literature results but also examine the latest publications’ strengths and weaknesses. The publication lacks a quantitative comparison of the proposed solutions, e.g. the catalytic activity, degradation efficiency, etc. This is very important, especially considering their possible application currently/in the future.
As wisely suggested by the reviewer, we have conceived a summarizing table for each section of the review. In those, we have reported the meaningful properties, in terms of chemical nature, synthetic approaches, technological applications, photo-activity and photo-efficiency of the hybrid materials object of the main latest publications. We agree that they could favor the comparison of the proposed approaches in designing and using of hybrid organic-inorganic nanomaterials for photocatalytic applications.
Although these are Figures (Figures: 1, 8, 13, 17, 20; Scheme 2) from other publications (reprinted with permission), their quality must be improved. In Table 1 there are no references. In Figure 3 reaction is not balanced. Hydrogens are missing on the right.
We have tried to improve the figures quality in the revised version. Also, both Table 1 and Figure 3 have been modified in the revised version. Now figures have added as a consequence of the changes realized in the revised manuscript.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Review of manuscript Catalysts-681215-r1
The manuscript “Photosensitive hybrid nanostructured materials: the big challenges for sunlight capture” has been corrected by authors: Giuseppina Luciani, Claudio Imparato and Giuseppe Vitiello. Almost all my suggestions have been taken into account. I have no further comments, except for one minor editorial comment: I again note that the reaction in Figure 3 is unbalanced. Even if authors use figure from other publication, they shouldn’t reproduce errors and appropriate adjustments should be made. On the right side there are no two hydrogens from the group NH (see left side of the reaction).
In my opinion this version of manuscript is worth to be published in Catalysts after minor correction.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for the positive comments. We have modified the figure 3 in order to respect the correct balance.
Sincerely,
Giuseppe Vitiello
