Transaminase Catalysis for Enantiopure Saturated Heterocycles as Potential Drug Scaffolds
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I have provided my comments on the paper in the attached manuscript. I do not have any doubts that the paper provides a valuable report on the application of TA to API synthesis. I am however confused by the construction of the paper - is it an original report or a review? If the former the authors should significantly shorten the introduction which is approximately 50% of the total paper length. This is very distracting and not necessary in the context of the reported screening.
I also would like to point out that all original data lack error bars in figures and tables. This should be amended both in the manuscript and in the SI.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
The responses were compiled into a single PDF file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript intitled “Transaminase catalysis for enantiopure saturated heterocycles 2 as potential drug scaffolds” describes the development of transaminase-catalyzed asymmetric synthesis of a new group of potential chiral drug scaffolds. The results are of great importance for the pharmaceutical industry in the development of new drugs. The manuscript is well written and important results are obtained.
Abstract
Concrete results are missing in this part, as well as a conclusion sentence. “were successfully isolated in enantiopure form with good to excellent yield.” What do you mean by “successfully”, “good to excellent”? which values show that? And which is the implication of these results?
Several acronyms are cited in the text without proper explanation of meaning, ex: JAK, API, FDA…
Introduction is too long. Authors should consider a “more to the point” text.
Pages 8 and 9: paragraph separation is wrong and a balk page appears. In pages 12 and 13 this mistake also happens.
In result and discussion section, the discussion is missing. A comparison with other results in literature should be added and the innovative characteristics of these results should be more clear.
In materials and methods the amount of TA is stipulated in mass (mg). The activity of this enzyme should be measured, and this value should be in the text.
Author Response
The responses to Reviewers is compiled in a single PDF file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
