Visible Light Photocatalyst and Antibacterial Activity of BFO (Bismuth Ferrite) Nanoparticles from Honey
, Md Ataul Islam 6 and Wen-Cheng Lai 7,8,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please rewrite the end of the introduction (lines 65-75) in such a way as to indicate the purpose of the work, the innovative nature of the solution and the novelty of the results obtained.
Please explain what this means: "Honey which are of analytical grade" (line 80).
Throughout the work, three materials are taken into account, two of which have been confirmed as BFO (2 and 55 Bi). The results of the XRD analysis do not confirm that the material described as "0% Excess Bi" is BiFeO3. Please explain what the main crystalline phase of this material is. I am also asking for a change of the concept of the work, because such material is not comparable to the other two.
Please clarify the phrase: "The honey molecules provide a better catalytic and bacterial activity" (lines 156-157).
Lines 181-182 - "The emission appeared at 587 nm in 181 all the BFO nanoparticles but their intensities are varying depends on the bismuth [30-31]" - this is not visible in Figure 4.
The authors say that the use of honey in the process makes it a "green technology". Please, develop this idea. The mere natural origin of the honey does not mean that the process is "green". Honey is too valuable a product to be used as a "green" alternative to other energy sources. The proposed process does not use the properties of honey, but its energy value, which results from the presence of high-energy organic compounds. Is it legitimate?
Author Response
Please rewrite the end of the introduction (lines 65-75) in such a way as to indicate the purpose of the work, the innovative nature of the solution and the novelty of the results obtained.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the introduction section in revised manuscript
Please explain what this means: "Honey which are of analytical grade" (line 80).
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have corrected the sentences
Throughout the work, three materials are taken into account, two of which have been confirmed as BFO (2 and 55 Bi). The results of the XRD analysis do not confirm that the material described as "0% Excess Bi" is BiFeO3. Please explain what the main crystalline phase of this material is. I am also asking for a change of the concept of the work, because such material is not comparable to the other two.
Answer: The 0% Excess of Bi does not exhibit the proper BFO phase. The phase instability was overcome by the addition of excess Bi into BFO structure.
Please clarify the phrase: "The honey molecules provide a better catalytic and bacterial activity" (lines 156-157).
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have corrected the sentences
Lines 181-182 - "The emission appeared at 587 nm in 181 all the BFO nanoparticles but their intensities are varying depends on the bismuth [30-31]" - this is not visible in Figure 4.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have included the enlarged image of PL spectrocopy
The authors say that the use of honey in the process makes it a "green technology". Please, develop this idea. The mere natural origin of the honey does not mean that the process is "green". Honey is too valuable a product to be used as a "green" alternative to other energy sources. The proposed process does not use the properties of honey, but its energy value, which results from the presence of high-energy organic compounds. Is it legitimate?
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the introduction section in revised manuscript
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors prepared the manuscript on Visible light photocatalyst and antibacterial activity of BFO nanoparticles from honey. There are some important points which need to be improved. This manuscript can be considered if the authors clarify the following points:
- Detailed experimental conditions should be discussed.
- Many lines are appearing in x-ray diffraction. Slow scan of x-ray diffraction is recommended for better understanding
- Additional experiments are needed to support the photocatalytic degradation of dye.
- Photocatalytic degradation reaction mechanism should be discussed with the degraded products.
- English should be improved.
Author Response
The authors prepared the manuscript on Visible light photocatalyst and antibacterial activity of BFO nanoparticles from honey. There are some important points which need to be improved. This manuscript can be considered if the authors clarify the following points:
- Detailed experimental conditions should be discussed.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestion we have included the detailed experiment conditions in the scheme format in revised manuscript.
- Many lines are appearing in x-ray diffraction. Slow scan of x-ray diffraction is recommended for better understanding
Answer: We have tried to perform XRD slow scan analysis but labs are closed and we did not have such an instrument. We are unable to more characterization. We will do XRD slow scan analysis in our upcoming papers the same.
- Additional experiments are needed to support the photocatalytic degradation of dye.
Answer: We have performed without catalyst dye degradation ability and dark condition photocatalytic activity.
- Photocatalytic degradation reaction mechanism should be discussed with the degraded products.
Answer: We have included the detailed photodegradation mechanism and included the detailed discussion with the degraded products in revised manuscript.
- English should be improved.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions the manuscript were completely checked and corrected the mistakes and typos in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Here the authors claimed that a novel combustion technique was developed for the synthesis of BiFeO3 photocatalyst, which show good activity for photocatalytic degradation of MB dye and bacteria. This work is of common interest in the field of water pollution and sterilization. However, some key problems in the paper are unclear, which must be clarified before publication.
Comment 1: Any abbreviation in the title should be provided. For instance, “BFO” in the title and “NFO, ZFO” in the introduction section.
Comment 2: The XRD of BFO (0 % Excess Bi) sample does not match well with the standard JCPDS No: 71-2494, so impurities should be analyzed in detail.
Comment 3: The resolution of picture Figure 3b is a little bit low, the author should modify.
Comment 4: Line 215 in Page 8: "7.24.7 eV" is incorrect. "724.7 eV" ?
Comment 5: The Fe 2p and O1s of XPS spectra should be re-fitted. It is better to add the XPS spectra of BiFeO3 (0 % excess bismuth BFO) and BiFeO3 (5% excess bismuth BFO) in order to compare the surface state of BiFeO3 (3% excess bismuth BFO).
Comment 6: The TEM image of BiFeO3 (2 % excess bismuth BFO) sample should be analyzed.
Comment 7: The stability of BiFeO3 (2 % excess bismuth BFO) towards solution and light corrosion should be provided.
Comment 8: Could the author comment on the possibility of the formation of heterojunction (Bi25FeO40/BiFeO3) inside the BiFeO3? Such junctions were reported to promote charge separation and therefore the photocatalytic performance due to the build-in electric field, balanced references are suggested: J. Phys. Chem. C 2021, 125, 9818-9826 and ACS Catal. 2021, 13463-13471.
Author Response
Here the authors claimed that a novel combustion technique was developed for the synthesis of BiFeO3 photocatalyst, which show good activity for photocatalytic degradation of MB dye and bacteria. This work is of common interest in the field of water pollution and sterilization. However, some key problems in the paper are unclear, which must be clarified before publication.
Comment 1: Any abbreviation in the title should be provided. For instance, “BFO” in the title and “NFO, ZFO” in the introduction section.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the introduction section in revised manuscript
Comment 2: The XRD of BFO (0 % Excess Bi) sample does not match well with the standard JCPDS No: 71-2494, so impurities should be analyzed in detail.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the XRD section in revised manuscript
Comment 3: The resolution of picture Figure 3b is a little bit low, the author should modify.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the Figure 3-b in revised manuscript
Comment 4: Line 215 in Page 8: "7.24.7 eV" is incorrect. "724.7 eV" ?
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the line 215 in revised manuscript
Comment 5: The Fe 2p and O1s of XPS spectra should be re-fitted. It is better to add the XPS spectra of BiFeO3 (0 % excess bismuth BFO) and BiFeO3 (5% excess bismuth BFO) in order to compare the surface state of BiFeO3 (3% excess bismuth BFO).
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions we have modified the XPS images and fitted properly in revised manuscript
Comment 6: The TEM image of BiFeO3 (2 % excess bismuth BFO) sample should be analyzed.
Answer: We have tried to perform HRTEM and XPS analysis but labs are closed and we did not have such an instrument. We are unable to more characterization. We will do HRTEM and XPS analysis in our upcoming papers the same.
Comment 7: The stability of BiFeO3 (2 % excess bismuth BFO) towards solution and light corrosion should be provided.
Answer: We have tried to perform stability analysis but labs are closed and we did not have such an instrument. We are unable to more characterization. We will do stability analysis our upcoming papers the same and we have done the dye stability without catalyst and dark condition analysis also done .
Comment 8: Could the author comment on the possibility of the formation of heterojunction (Bi25FeO40/BiFeO3) inside the BiFeO3? Such junctions were reported to promote charge separation and therefore the photocatalytic performance due to the build-in electric field, balanced references are suggested: J. Phys. Chem. C 2021, 125, 9818-9826 and ACS Catal. 2021, 13463-13471.
Answer: As per reviewer suggestions the papers have been cited perfectly with proper placement in revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please correct the text carefully, because the 0% material is not BFO.
180-181: How does honey affect the catalytic properties of a material if the preparation assumes calcination at a temperature of 600 ° C?
Author Response
Please correct the text carefully, because the 0% material is not BFO.
Ans: Thanks for the reviewer valuable comments and we have modified the text in revised manuscript.
180-181: How does honey affect the catalytic properties of a material if the preparation assumes calcination at a temperature of 600 ° C?
Ans: Thanks for the reviewer valuable suggestions and we have modified sentences in revised manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been revised well ad I do recommend that the revised manuscript can be accepted for publication in this journal.
Author Response
Thanks for the reviewer valuable comments and suggestions.
