p. 19 "Procerain, a stable cysteine protease […] was found to have a molecular mass of 28.8KDa and an isoelectric point of 9.32." The original paper (Dubey, VK and Jagannadham, MV (2003) Phytochemistry, 62, 1057-1071) should also be referenced here, in addition to the citation on the end of the following paragraph.
p.33 The protease assay should be described before the first time its referenced (i.e. before the “Effect of Substrate Concentration and Protease Activity of Isolate” section.
The data on Figs 1 to 8 would be much more readable in tabular form. The data in Figs 4-8 are from single measurements in each strain, or they averages from different cultures from each strain?
Figs 9-14 would be more easily interpreted if they were presented as "effect of temperature in each strain" (i.e. one graph per strain, showing protease production at different temperatures, in a total of three graphs) instead of the current presentation of 6 graphs with three strains eache, which force the reader to move back and forth in order to understand which temperature is best for each organism, and which set of conditions is most favourable.
Figs 15-18 should benefit from a similar presentation (i.e., by strain, instead of "by innoculum size")