Laser-Induced Refractive Index Indicates the Concurrent Role of the Bio-Structuration Process in the Comparison with the Nano-Structuration One
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Editor,
I have read the manuscript entitled: “Laser-induced refractive index indicates the concurrent role of the bio-structuration process in the comparison with the nano-structuration one” and I would like to address following suggestions to the authors:
In Introduction, recent references should be inserted, especially at lines 52-76. In the current form of the manuscript most references are to the first author.
Line 41: appearing is coincided ” should be “appearing coincided
Line 56: point of view the modification” should be “point of view is the modification
Line 71: whose can be ” should be “which can be ;
Line 82: The authors say: “responsible for “What are they responsible for? Please rewrite. Go on!
Line 92: “CNTs” explains in detail what it means.
Line 119: liquid crustal ” should be “ liquid crystal ;
Line 120: Photoreftactivity ” should be “ Photorefractivity;
Line 128: adequate understand ” should be “ adequately understand;
Line 156: electrons is numbered ” should be “ electrons are numbered;
Line 157: DNA-structured ” should be “ DNA-structures;
La liniile 164, 165, The authors say: “Analyzing the data shown in Fig.2 it should be mentioned, that classical ellipsome try method can correlate with the laser-induced change of the refractive index.” The question would be: .what are the data from ellipsometry? Where is?
Line 171: can correlated ” should be “can be correlated
The authors may wish to discuss briefly how the literature data presented in Table 1 compares with the results obtained in this manuscript.
In Table 1, lines 5 and 7, what does the symbol - "-" mean? These symbols should be the samples from this manuscript. Let's put the name of the samples.
Supplementary Materials: What this scheme contains? (too general said, “the scheme”).
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you very much for your useful comments and question to our paper. I am following to your remarks and answering to your comments. All paragraphs changed or included are collared in the revised version of the paper with yellow.
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Editor,
I have read the manuscript entitled: “Laser-induced refractive index indicates the concurrent role of the bio-structuration process in the comparison with the nano-structuration one” and I would like to address following suggestions to the authors:
In Introduction, recent references should be inserted, especially at lines 52-76. In the current form of the manuscript most references are to the first author.
Line 41: appearing is coincided ” should be “appearing coincided
Line 56: point of view the modification” should be “point of view is the modification
Line 71: whose can be ” should be “which can be ;
Line 82: The authors say: “responsible for “What are they responsible for? Please rewrite. Go on!
Line 92: “CNTs” explains in detail what it means.
Line 119: liquid crustal ” should be “ liquid crystal ;
Line 120: Photoreftactivity ” should be “ Photorefractivity;
Line 128: adequate understand ” should be “ adequately understand;
Line 156: electrons is numbered ” should be “ electrons are numbered;
Line 157: DNA-structured ” should be “ DNA-structures;
La liniile 164, 165, The authors say: “Analyzing the data shown in Fig.2 it should be mentioned, that classical ellipsome try method can correlate with the laser-induced change of the refractive index.” The question would be: .what are the data from ellipsometry? Where is?
Line 171: can correlated ” should be “can be correlated
The authors may wish to discuss briefly how the literature data presented in Table 1 compares with the results obtained in this manuscript.
In Table 1, lines 5 and 7, what does the symbol - "-" mean? These symbols should be the samples from this manuscript. Let's put the name of the samples.
Supplementary Materials: What this scheme contains? (too general said, “the scheme”).
Submission Date
02 August 2022
Date of this review
02 Aug 2022 13:45:16
My answers are here
Many thanks for the corrections related to the correct spelling of English words and expressions! I have checked these comments and correct the words and sentences needed. All of them are collared with yellow.
About other questions I would like to tell the following: 1). The ellipsometry measurement data are shown in Fig.2. The type of the device I have included in the Materials and Methods part. It was shown the refractive index change for the nano- and bio-doped structures. 2). I have added novel (up to 2022) data in order to save my own referee list. It is important to show the link between previously obtained results in this area and recent ones. Moreover, it can be find my Lab research among other international teams. 3). I have improved the name of the materials in Table 1.
Thus, so many changes have been made according your correction and advices, thank you!
Best Regards,
Natalia Kamanina
=======================================
Natalia V. Kamanina (Prof., Dr.Sci., PhD)
Head of the lab for Photophysics of media with nanoobjects
Vavilov State Optical Institute
Kadetskaya Liniya V.O., dom.5, korpus 2,
St.- Petersburg, 199053, Russia
Professor of the St.-Petersburg Electrotechnical University (“LETI”),
Part-time Leading Researcher at Nuclear Physics Institute (Gatchina)
Job phone: +7 (812) 327-00-95
Fax: +7 (812) 331-75-58 (for N.V.Kamanina)
e-mail: nvkamanina@mail.ru
Lab_cite: sites.google.com/view/photophysics-lab
https://publons.com/researcher/1696479/natalia-kamanina/
https://sciprofiles.com/news-feed
http://rusnor.org/network/webinars/10203.htm
http://www.npkgoi.ru/?module=articles&c=profil&b=7
http://www.nanometer.ru/2007/08/09/liquid_crystal_3905.html
http://www.eltech.ru/ru/fakultety/fakultet-elektroniki/sostav-fakulteta/kafedra-kvantovoy-elektroniki-i-optiko-elektronnyh-priborov/sostav-kafedry
=======================================
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper, “Laser-induced refractive index indicates the concurrent role of the bio-structuration process in the comparison with the nano-structuration one,” the authors comparatively investigate the effect of the introduction of bio-objects and of nano-objects in the organic conjugated materials. The influence of this process on photorefractive features has been demonstrated. Overall, this manuscript has a strong potential for another review round after applying the issues and addressing the shortcomings listed below:
1-The authors should polish/revise some grammatical mistakes and typos along the manuscript. I invite the authors to read their manuscript carefully and make the required changes where necessary.
2-In the Introduction section, while discussing recent developments in the field of nano-objects based biosensing/biomedicine, the following work should also be considered and cited to give a more general view to the possible readers of the work: [(i) Plasmonic gadolinium oxide nanomatryoshkas: bifunctional magnetic resonance imaging enhancers for photothermal cancer therapy, PNAS Nexus, pgac140 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac140].
3-Pay attention to the self-citation issue (~23/60). Dramatically reduce the number of self-citations.
4-Please provide the copyright information of the corresponding article (in the caption of Figure 1) if you obtained Figure 1 from some other article.
5-In Figure 1b, please explain the meaning of each numbered step (e.g., 1-5) along the manuscript.
6-In Figures 2 and 3, please increase the font size of the texts.
7-In the “Conclusions” section, do not use numbers. Please revise this section as including a regular paragraph(s).
Author Response
Dear Reviewer!
Thank you very much for your useful comments and question to our paper. I am following to your remarks and answering to your comments. All paragraphs changed or included are collared in the revised version of the paper with green.
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
In this paper, “Laser-induced refractive index indicates the concurrent role of the bio-structuration process in the comparison with the nano-structuration one,” the authors comparatively investigate the effect of the introduction of bio-objects and of nano-objects in the organic conjugated materials. The influence of this process on photorefractive features has been demonstrated. Overall, this manuscript has a strong potential for another review round after applying the issues and addressing the shortcomings listed below:
1-The authors should polish/revise some grammatical mistakes and typos along the manuscript. I invite the authors to read their manuscript carefully and make the required changes where necessary.
2-In the Introduction section, while discussing recent developments in the field of nano-objects based biosensing/biomedicine, the following work should also be considered and cited to give a more general view to the possible readers of the work: [(i) Plasmonic gadolinium oxide nanomatryoshkas: bifunctional magnetic resonance imaging enhancers for photothermal cancer therapy, PNAS Nexus, pgac140 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac140].
3-Pay attention to the self-citation issue (~23/60). Dramatically reduce the number of self-citations.
4-Please provide the copyright information of the corresponding article (in the caption of Figure 1) if you obtained Figure 1 from some other article.
5-In Figure 1b, please explain the meaning of each numbered step (e.g., 1-5) along the manuscript.
6-In Figures 2 and 3, please increase the font size of the texts.
7-In the “Conclusions” section, do not use numbers. Please revise this section as including a regular paragraph(s).
Submission Date
02 August 2022
Date of this review
07 Aug 2022 04:00:48
My answers are here
1). Thanks a lot, sorry. I have checked the paper and tried to improve it via grammatical sentences control.
2). Nice recommendation. I have not found this paper in internet, some cites now are blocked for the Russian scientists, sorry. But, I have included your advice with this paper in Ref.list it is [18].
3). Yes, it is a problem to me. I would like to show our own job in this direction. But, I have included some papers from other authors in order to decrease my own ones.
4). This is my own figure, which I have presented in the different variant in the different papers. It is necessary in order to explain the idea about the dominant role of the INTERmolecular charge transfer process.
5). Yes, good remarks! I have included some paragraph in the Results and Discussion part, after the explanation of Fig.1.
6). I have increased the font size in Fig.2. I have saved the font size in Fig.3, because so many data are presented in this pictures, it is not good in the types of the materials will be as the mixture.
7). OK, I have illuminated the numbers in the Conclusion part.
Thus, so many changes have been made according your correction and advices, thank you!
Best Regards,
Natalia Kamanina
=======================================
Natalia V. Kamanina (Prof., Dr.Sci., PhD)
Head of the lab for Photophysics of media with nanoobjects
Vavilov State Optical Institute
Kadetskaya Liniya V.O., dom.5, korpus 2,
St.- Petersburg, 199053, Russia
Professor of the St.-Petersburg Electrotechnical University (“LETI”),
Part-time Leading Researcher at Nuclear Physics Institute (Gatchina)
Job phone: +7 (812) 327-00-95
Fax: +7 (812) 331-75-58 (for N.V.Kamanina)
e-mail: nvkamanina@mail.ru
Lab_cite: sites.google.com/view/photophysics-lab
https://publons.com/researcher/1696479/natalia-kamanina/
https://sciprofiles.com/news-feed
http://rusnor.org/network/webinars/10203.htm
http://www.npkgoi.ru/?module=articles&c=profil&b=7
http://www.nanometer.ru/2007/08/09/liquid_crystal_3905.html
http://www.eltech.ru/ru/fakultety/fakultet-elektroniki/sostav-fakulteta/kafedra-kvantovoy-elektroniki-i-optiko-elektronnyh-priborov/sostav-kafedry
=======================================
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript was improved and can .net published.
Reviewer 2 Report
In its current form, the revised manuscript is suitable for publication.
