All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
After revisions, all reviewers agreed to publish the manuscript. I also reviewed the manuscript and found no obvious risks to publication. Therefore, I also approved the publication of this manuscript.
No comment
No comment
No comment
No comment
This revised version is suitable for publication.
-
-
-
The authors are requested to carefully revise the manuscript and answer the questions raised by the reviewers.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Reviewer 1 has provided a PDF of their comments #]
Please see my attached comments.
Please see my attached comments.
Please see my attached comments.
Although the topic is of interest to the scientific community, this paper should be improved before being considered for publication in any academic journal. Authors should reconsider the main objective of the review paper according to its content. They should try to synthesize and emphasize the study's main findings and avoid long sentences. The methodology is standard and does not introduce innovative techniques that could enhance the research's contribution. Additionally, the paper's structure needs improvement for better readability and coherence. In addition, the conclusion is not well-written and fails to summarize the findings and highlight their significance effectively.
-
You must provide all the figures in high resolution and make the labels and legends more legible.
1. Abstract; The authors should revise the abstract; it is too general. Moreover, it could be further developed, as the article has a lot of interesting data. An informative and representative conclusion should be added to the abstract.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.