Peer-Review Record
Evaluating the Effect of Tissue Selection on the Characteristics of Extracellular Matrix Hydrogels from Decellularized Porcine Bladders
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(13), 5820; https://doi.org/10.3390/app11135820
Reviewer 1:
Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(13), 5820; https://doi.org/10.3390/app11135820
Submission received: 2 June 2021
/
Revised: 15 June 2021
/
Accepted: 20 June 2021
/
Published: 23 June 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Applied Biosciences and Bioengineering)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors should address several points.
- give a more solid rationale explaining the choice for the examined cell lines;
- alamar blue is a viability test. Proliferation assays should be performed
- references should be halfened. This is not a review paper
- English writing needs to be improved (i.e. L31 "effects"; L 32 "indicate", L90, 91 "referred"...
- reference 15, which is cited several times, is incomplete
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In the manuscript entitled “Evaluating the effect of tissue selection on the characteristics of extracellular matrix hydrogels from decellularized porcine bladders” the authors characterized the fabrication of hydrogels from a subtype extracellular matrix (sECM) and whole bladder. Below are the suggestions to improve the manuscript.
- How many times the experiments were carried out in each figure? This information should be mentioned in the figure legends of each figure.
- Italics should be used for in vivo throughout the manuscript.
- In figure#7, for the Western blot of myogenin, the authors should do densidometric analysis of the bands and indicate the same quantitatively.
- The authors should come up with more mechanistic explanations for their results.
- The authors should have explored the utility of their ECM hydrogels in other applications as well.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors addressed all my previous criticisms
