.jpg)
Multimodification of a 304 Stainless Steel Surface Based on DA/PEI/SiO2 for Improving Surface Antimicrobial Performance
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript presents an interesting study on developing an antimicrobial composite coating. With some improvements following the comments provided, the manuscript has the potential to make a valuable contribution.
1. In the Introduction section, provide a solid justification for choosing 304 SS and its modification.
2. Discuss the novelty of your approach compared to existing methods for surface modification and antimicrobial coatings.
3. In Section 2.4, instead of simply stating that Vibrio natriegens is a common marine gram-negative bacterium, there should be rigorous reason beneath this bacteria's consideration.
4. Ra denotes the arithmetical mean deviation of the. Rv denotes the maximum profile valley depth. Rq denotes the root mean square deviation of the profile. This shouldn't be incorporated inside the table 2. Provide this as a "Note" below the table.
5. What is the coating thickness?
6. Provide specific details on the surface modification process, such as the concentrations of dopamine, PEI, and silica nanoparticles used, the reaction conditions, and the duration of the modification process.
7. A comparison table of the developed DA/PEI/SiO2 composite coating with existing antimicrobial coatings or surface modification methods, including a discussion on the advantages and limitations, is appreciable.
8. There are some instances where the sentence is repetitive or unclear. It is impossible to quote each of those. However, authors are asked to work on this.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Check for minor grammar errors. Ensure the sentences have coherence and work on repetitive sentences that lack clarity.
Author Response
The modified content is marked in red in the text.
1. In the Introduction section, provide a solid justification for choosing 304 SS and its modification.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already added it in the last paragraph of “Introduction” section.
2. Discuss the novelty of your approach compared to existing methods for surface modification and antimicrobial coatings.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already added the novelty in the revised manuscript of “Results and discussion” section.
3. In Section 2.4, instead of simply stating that Vibrio natriegens is a common marine gram-negative bacterium, there should be rigorous reason beneath this bacteria's consideration.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
4. Ra denotes the arithmetical mean deviation of the. Rv denotes the maximum profile valley depth. Rq denotes the root mean square deviation of the profile. This shouldn't be incorporated inside the table 2. Provide this as a "Note" below the table.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
5. What is the coating thickness?
Response: Thank you for your comment. The thickness information has already been added in the updated manuscript and “Supplementary materials”.
6. Provide specific details on the surface modification process, such as the concentrations of dopamine, PEI, and silica nanoparticles used, the reaction conditions, and the duration of the modification process.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already made revision in section 2.2 of the updated manuscript。
7.A comparison table of the developed DA/PEI/SiO2 composite coating with existing antimicrobial coatings or surface modification methods, including a discussion on the advantages and limitations, is appreciable.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. The comparison table and relative discussion have already been added in the updated manuscript and “Supplementary materials”.
8. There are some instances where the sentence is repetitive or unclear. It is impossible to quote each of those. However, authors are asked to work on this.
Response: Thank you for your comment. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
9. Check for minor grammar errors. Ensure the sentences have coherence and work on repetitive sentences that lack clarity.
Response: Thank you for your suggestions. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article coatings-2677498 entitled "Multi-modification of 304 stainless steel surface based on DA/PEI/SiO2 for improving surface antimicrobial performance" has been submitted for publication in the journal Coatings (MDPI).
The research deals with the deposition of a composite coating made of dopamine (DA), polyethyleneimine (PEI), and SiO2 on a steel substrate. The coating is deposited by immersion to provide antifouling/antibacterial properties to steel. Several characterizations are described, including FTIR, XPS, SEM, contact angle measurements, and profilometry. The antibacterial properties of the coating are assessed in contact with bacteria named Vibrio natriegens for up to seven days. The results show improved antibacterial properties with this composite coating that could be used for medical devices or aquaculture applications.
In my opinion, this study is interesting and contains valuable results that are thoroughly described. The mechanism explaining the antibacterial property of the composite coating is appropriately discussed. This article could be worthy of publication in the journal Coatings after considering the following minor points:
- several peaks of the FTIR (Figure 2), XPS (Figure 3), and EDS (Figure 4) spectra are not indexed. Some information and comments about these peaks should be added to the manuscript.
- the quantitative XPS values in Table 1 should be written with only one digit after the decimal point.
- the number of digits in Table 2 and the corresponding values in the text should also be reduced.
- more references should be added to support the claim about the wettability and the antibacterial properties of the coating.
- an additional discussion is necessary to highlight the expected applications of the coating. Why is this innovative coating better than the others described in the scientific literature?
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageSome minor corrections of English language are necessary.
Author Response
The modified content is marked in blue in the text.
1. several peaks of the FTIR (Figure 2), XPS (Figure 3), and EDS (Figure 5) spectra are not indexed. Some information and comments about these peaks should be added to the manuscript.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have added the relevant information to the revised manuscript.
2. the quantitative XPS values in Table 1 should be written with only one digit after the decimal point.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
3. the number of digits in Table 2 and the corresponding values in the text should also be reduced.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
4. more references should be added to support the claim about the wettability and the antibacterial properties of the coating.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have added some relevant references to the revised manuscript.
5. an additional discussion is necessary to highlight the expected applications of the coating. Why is this innovative coating better than the others described in the scientific literature?
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already added the novelty in the“Results and discussion” section of the revised manuscript.
6. Some minor corrections of English language are necessary.
Response: Thank you for your suggestions. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReview report
The manuscript presented the deposition of coatings consisting of silica nanoparticles, dopamine and polyethyleneimine on a stainless steel substrate by immersion method to develop antibacterial surfaces with appropriate antifouling features. The structural, morphological and surface characteristics of the modified surface were evaluated.Some statements are required to be explained before the manuscript may be considered for revision.
The details of the addressed comments are as follows:
1. Some sentences in the text of the article need to be refined grammatically, lines 28-30 and 122.
2. Abbreviations should be written in the original form the first time they appear in the text: line 57, SFG; line 59, PEI, OPEG, OEG.
3. Line 118 Is SS-DA-PEI/SiO2 correct?
4. Based on the surface roughness results, can the authors present other factors that exaggerate surface topographical differences such as skewness or kurtosis?
5. In figure 5, peaks around 5.4 KeV and 6.4 KeV and 2 correspond to what elements?
6. In the OD test, it is necessary to accurately evaluate the significance of the changes by statistical evaluation, for example by p-value
Comments on the Quality of English Language
It is suggested to refine the text.
Author Response
The modified content is marked in green in the text.
1. Some sentences in the text of the article need to be refined grammatically, lines 28-30 and 122.
Response: Thank you for your comments. We have already made revision in the updated manuscript.
2. Abbreviations should be written in the original form the first time they appear in the text: line 57, SFG; line 59, PEI, OPEG, OEG.
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have already changed them in the revised version.
3. Line 118 Is SS-DA-PEI/SiO2 correct?
Response: Thank you for your comments. SS-DA-PEI/SiO2 is correct in line 118, in order to compare the steps of dopamine addition, we analyzed the FTIR of SS-DA-PEI/SiO2 and SS-DA/PEI/SiO2 and added the analysis to line 208-211.
4. Based on the surface roughness results, can the authors present other factors that exaggerate surface topographical differences such as skewness or kurtosis?
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We have added maximum profile peak height (Rp) in the updated manuscript for increasing the richness of sample surface parameters.
5. In figure 5, peaks around 5.4 KeV and 6.4 KeV correspond to what elements?
Response: Thank you for your comments. The peaks near 5.4KeV and 6.4KeV come from Cr and Fe on the surface of 304 SS, as the sample surface has a porous structure that allows detection of part of the substrate surfaces.
6. In the OD test, it is necessary to accurately evaluate the significance of the changes by statistical evaluation, for example by p-value
Response: Thank you for your good suggestion. We re-drawn the results of the OD test based on significance.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAll comments have been well addressed. This new version of the article is suggested to be accepted.
