Repurposing the Strontium Ranelate Antiosteoporotic Drug as a New Outstanding Biocompatible Blue Dye
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Manuscript ID: colorants-2517874; Title: “Repurposing the strontium ranelate antiosteoporotic drug to generate an outstanding biocompatible blue dye”. The author claims that they isolated ranelic acid from the treatment of strontium ranelate with hydrochloric acid, and observed the formation of a vivid blue color in solution which was ascribed to a new dye, denoted ranelate blue, or RanB is its vivid blue color. They founded elucidating the photophysics and photochemical behavior of the RanB dye and explored its interaction with lanthanoid metals, particularly Tb3+ ions. The topic is interesting for the referee. Therefore, I recommend publication in Colorants after minor revisions.
1) The abstract of this paper does not look effective; the author needs to rewrite the abstract and needs to include the motivation and necessity of this research.
2) The author needs to include an introduction, what are Advantages and Disadvantages and the importance of this research, and more background on previous results,
3) Page No:2, the author needs to include appropriate working principles for this paper for better understanding.
4) section: 2.1; Synthesis of RanB: include graphical figures (conversation) for each step for easy to be understood.
5) On page No: 4, the author needs to write the full form of the “MTT method”.
6) in Figure 2; the author needs to assign what are black, red, and violet curves.
7) The author, has been recorded the CV of the compound? Needs to include.
8) What is the standard used for fluorescence quantum yield calculations? Needs to include.
9) The conclusions of this paper are too long. I think that the author needs to rewrite/shorter the conclusions.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
please, see the attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript titled "Repurposing the strontium ranelate antiosteoporotic drug to generate an outstanding biocompatible blue dye" discusses the photophysics and photochemical behavior of a blue dye, namely RanB a novel dithiophene blue dye derived from an old antiosteroporotic drug. Further, its interactions with lanthanoid metals, particularly Tb3+ ions were also studied. The idea covered in the manuscript is good and collectively presents the results for non-toxic RanB showing minimal impact on the viability of human umbilical vein endothelial cells. Also, it is able to stain yeast cells from Kefir cultures, allowing their hyperspectral imaging using dark field CytoViva microscopy. The manuscript is inline with the journal Colorants. However, the manuscript lacks on few aspects as mentioned below.
1. The manuscript needs extensive English corrections, especially for typo errors.
2. The abstract of the manuscript needs revision as it lacks proper elaboration of the work. For example, the methods and techniques used are missing.
3. The Introduction section is not comprehensive and lacks proper discussion with recent literature. The authors are suggested to revise the Introduction section appropriately.
4. Since, DFT studies are the major part of the work, therefore, inclusion of the role of DFT studies in different sections, Abstract, Introduction, and Conclusion of the manuscript would enhance the overall impact of the work.
5. The purpose of Fig. 2 seems to be incomplete. For instance, a comparison with commercial RanB or other similar dyes could be provided.
6. Apart from light, is there any effect of pH or temperature on the RanB? A figure with this study could be added for better understanding of the physicochemical characteristics of the RanB.
7. Revise Fig. 9 for its presentation. The 0% RanB can be labeled as control on the X-axis. Further, the units for Y-axis and legends could be labelled appropriately.
Please refer to the Reviewer comments.
Author Response
please see the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In this manuscript, the results of this research are conveyed thoughtfully and completely, and they are consistent with the experimental findings. However, the authors failed to explain and draw out the novelty of the work, this aspect needs to be improved. This work is worthwhile to be publish in this journal after minor revision. The following issues should be addressed:
1. Introduction is well-organized but the importance and novelty of the research should be highlighted and more clearly stated. The authors should give some examples of works in the bibliography, to clear the advantage of their work in comparison with those works.
2. The authors are responsible for the English, which should be polished throughout the manuscript to clear some minor typo/grammar errors.
3. The conclusion is too long and not targeted, please check it?
4. the references are not updated and very shorted, please update it.
5. In Materials and method section, please provide the purity of your chosen precursors.
Hence, I recommend it accepted for publication after minor revisions.
Author Response
please see the attached file
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors appropriately addressed the reviewer comments.
Minor editing of English language required
