Effect of Alginate Proportion in Glycerol-Reinforced Alginate–Starch Biofilms on Hydrogen Bonds by Raman Spectroscopy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This work is centered around the modification of biomass materials. This study has some practical value for the preparation of biomass materials. However, there are a number of issues that require further revision. This work was published in the journal with minor revisions agreed upon. The following comments will hopefully help improve the quality of this work:
1. The highlights of this work should be further emphasized in the introductory section.
2. The authors should further employ FT-IR to illustrate changes in hydrogen bonding.
3. The image format should be further modified.
4. There are some grammatical errors in the text, which the author should double-check and correct.
The language level is normal for this manuscript quality. This work is centered around the modification of biomass materials. This study has some practical value for the preparation of biomass materials. However, there are a number of issues that require further revision. This work was published in the journal with minor revisions agreed upon. The following comments will hopefully help improve the quality of this work:
Author Response
Corrections have been made in the text in red color.1) In the introduction section, we brought extra highlights
2) FTIR studies effectively provide information on hydrogen bonds. The study in FTIR
in transmission or in ATR has started. For the moment, we are experiencing small
problems in transmission due to the excessive thickness of the films. We are working
on this aspect.
Reviewer 2 Report
See attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
1. Editorial and language mistakes: comma before “
“assigned for” should be assigned to… (line 161); “spectral zone” should be spectral range
(lines 150, 170, 199 etc.); adjust size of fonts (lines 312-313; 323-324). According to
mentioned remarks please check whole text of the manuscript.
all requested corrections have been made directly in the manuscript in red
2. Line 204 we have changed are observed by have observed
3. Wavenumbers written in lines 207 and 209 (1465 cm-1 and 955 cm-1 according to Fig. 4 (1463 and 956 cm-1 ). The corrections have been made directly in the manuscript in red.
4. Lines 153, 240 and 288 – procedure described in section 2.3? I hope that spectral parameters of all bands were fitted. If so, please use fitted peaks not adjusted. We changed the sentence by: "Table 1 the values of the wavenumbers by pointing or by fitting for each vibrational modes"
5. line 247, we changed the police in symbol
6. line 253-254, idem than 5)
7. Labels of figures are not consistent. The rule is as follows: if you have numbers use
appropriate unit or a.u.; if you don’t have numbers don’t use a.u.; e.g. Fig. 1 description of
vertical axis Raman intensity – don’t use (a.u.) because of lack of numbers; Fig. 2 – use (a.u)
because you have numbers. Please correct all figures according the rules.
It's correct. But for figure 2, we don't need to put (a;u) even if we have numbers because they are ratios of areas.
8. What was the magnification and NA of optical objective used in the Raman spectroscopy
measurements? We added the following sentence in Materials and method for the raman spectroscopy section: "The magnification and NA of optical objective used in the Raman spectroscopy measure-ments were 50 and 25 micronm", respectively.
9. Which function was used for background correction? We used a line.
10. What is the thickness of the obtained layers/films? We added the following sentence in Materials and method for mixture preparation section: "The thickness of obtained films is of the order of 0.1 mm."
