Hydrothermal Synthesis of Vanadium Oxide Microstructures with Mixed Oxidation States

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This work is well-prepared and is within the scope of this journal. I recommend its publication without any revision. 

Author Response

Dear editor I had writen most of the paper again, there were so many mistakes that were corrected this time, also too many words that were not necessary were deleted to focus on the oxidations

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is well written. English grammar check is required. I suggest to better organize the chemical reactions and formatting them in a more comprehensible way. Moreover it would be better to modify SEM images and to show only magnification (Like in TEM images).

Author Response

Dear editor English has been written all over again, most of the mistakes are corrected, and most of the information has been re arranged to make the review understable and focus on the oxidation states, also the images change like it was suggested, the qualitative equations are all numbered. if you want me to change anything else or any other suggestion ill be looking forward to your repply 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Abstract needs to be revised, the sentences are too long, and this often creates confusion.

Some of the keywords used do not reflect the theme of this manuscript and should be revised like mixed oxidation state, morphological architectures, functionalization, etc.

Am not certain whether the format of the manuscript fits the description of a review paper. Please consider the guidelines for review articles.

The objectives of the study are well stated but some of the background information which is irrelevant needs to be removed. There are also numerous careless language errors and other technical errors in the manuscript which need to be revised.

The author discusses the contents of Figure 1 which is not mentioned in the introduction.

Equations needs to be correctly numbered and referenced.

Correct the paragraph in page 23 and 24 line 775 – 785 which is a very long sentence. There are also similar long sentences throughout the manuscript which needs to be corrected e.g. page 24 line 788 – 802.

Figure 7 is not mentioned in the discussion passage.

Author Response

Dear editor all english was written again, also the extensive sentences were reduced, the acid base section was eliminated, every qualitative reaction has been numbered, the ideas were rearrange to make them suitable for understanding, the confusing extra words were eliminated as well, In terms of references I only delete one, Ill be looking to your reply in case of any other changes or suggestions you want me to do

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

 Am very satisfied with all the corrections made to the revised copy except for the following few identified technical errors which am sure can be addressed in the final stage.

1. long sentences, please revise this part, e.g. the abstract has two long sentences.

2. Punctuation and spelling mistakes.