Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this manuscript, the authors reported that the method to produce metal-carbon composites, 13 Pt1-xNix/CNF, with an adjustable Pt/Ni ratio. The authors claimed that the Pt0.10Ni0.90/CNF and Pt0.20Ni0.80/CNF samples demonstrate the highest activity in this process, which exceeds the performance of the commercial 20 wt.% Pt/Vulcan XC-72R sample by 2 times. Thus, the proposed approach to the preparation of metal-carbon composite catalysts, in which platinum is replaced by cheaper nickel up to 80%, gives a possibility to reduce significantly the cost of implementing practically important electrochemical processes. In overall, this manuscript is interesting but in order to consider publication, this work should be revised. The following comments should be addressed for the improvement of their manuscript.

Comment 1: The overall study aims/novelty for this study about the        embedded in self-grown carbon nanofibers need to be further clarified in detail.

Comment 2: The various recent reports and their research findings on the “Pt1-xNix alloy nanoparticles embedded in self-grown carbon nanofibers” using various potential techniques and their electrochemical performance should be summarized into a table form and discussed for better understanding in term of benchmarking points with your research findings.

Comment 3: The role of graphene and zinc oxide with lattice defects and element partitioning within the 3DG-PANI-ZnO ternary nanocomposite in improving the supercapacitor performance should be further discuss with   fundamental support. 

Comment 4: The detailed XPS analysis can be included to further explain their lattice fridge, chemical state and electronic state of the elements that exist Pt1-xNix alloy nanoparticles.

Comment 5: In addition, the authors should conduct the RAMAN spectroscopy analysis to provide information such chemical structure, phase and molecular interactions within the Pt1-xNix alloy nanoparticles.

Comment 6: The EIS/PL analysis should be conducted to provide the information about the electron transfer rate of reaction within Pt1-xNix alloy nanoparticles.

.Comment 7: The carefully English correction is necessary for the whole manuscript. Please check and revise accordingly.

Comment 8: The list of reference need to be updated for more recent citations/journals.

Author Response

The file with response is attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Report on the manuscript catalysts-2241476-peer-review-v1 entitled “Pt1-xNix Alloy Nanoparticles Embedded in Self-Grown Carbon Nanofibers: Synthesis, Properties and Catalytic Activity in HER”.

The submitted manuscript should be revised. The following points should be addressed:

1. The submitted manuscript should be revised to be free from editing or grammar errors.

2. The mentioned XRD cards should have references.

3. What about the material surface area before and after adding carbon contents to Pt Ni alloy?

4. Electrochemical impedance analysis should be investigated to understand the charge transfer resistance of the introduced PtNi /CNF.

5. Could the authors support the characterization by XPS which will prove the surface chemistry of the prepared PtNi/CNF and compare it by EDX.

Author Response

The file with response is attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

In overall, this manuscript was technically well revised. This revised manuscript meets the criteria of Catalysts. Therefore, in my opinion, the revised manuscript can be accepted for publication. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Accept