Toward Effects of Hydrophobicity on Biosurfactant Production by Bacillus subtilis Isolates from Crude-Oil-Exposed Environments

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript applmicrobiol-2815500  entitled: „ Towards effects of hydrophobicity on biosurfactants production by Bacillus subtilis isolates from crude oil exposed environments”

The manuscript presents very valuable results. Also the presentation methods and graphics of the manuscript was well done. The presented researches are very actual and the presented subject fulfils the conditions for the publication in Applied Microbiology. Thus I strongly recommend the manuscript for the publication in the above mentioned journal. The strongest point of the presented work is the practical application of the studied system. Biosurfactants can be used in differend fields of our life. The description and explanation of the obtained results is fully sufficient to publish in the Applied Microbiology. I have only some comments according to the presentation of the obtained results:

1.      Tables can be presented in some better way. Their quality can be higher.

2.      The reference section should be checked carefully.

3.      The introduction section could be developped-especially according to the application of biosurfactants.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

The authors would like to thank you for your kind comments on the manuscript. You will find the revised manuscript in the attachment. In addition, below you will find the responses to your comments listed point by point:

• The manuscript presents very valuable results. Also the presentation methods and graphics of the manuscript was well done. The presented researches are very actual and the presented subject fulfils the conditions for the publication in Applied Microbiology. Thus I strongly recommend the manuscript for the publication in the above mentioned journal. The strongest point of the presented work is the practical application of the studied system. Biosurfactants can be used in differend fields of our life. The description and explanation of the obtained results is fully sufficient to publish in the Applied Microbiology.

-> The authors would like to thank you for your kind words.

• I have only some comments according to the presentation of the obtained results:
  
  Tables can be presented in some better way. Their quality can be higher.
  
  

-> The authors have provided a higher quality for Tables 1, 2 and 3 in the manuscript.

• The reference section should be checked carefully.

-> The authors have checked the reference section and adapted this part.

• The introduction section could be developped-especially according to the application of biosurfactants.

-> The authors have provided more information on biosurfactant applications in the introduction (lines 50-57).

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Title is appropriate for the manuscript.

Abstract: Length is suitable for the topic.

Background well reflects the importance of the research, but the aim not well mentioned in this section please edit this part.

Introduction: Please recite well the reference you start from reference 1 and directly to Ref No 22! reference should be well arranged.

Rationale of the study need to little effort from authors to reflect well the current manuscript.

Materials and methods: Can be divided into sub-sections (2.1, 2.2 and etc..)

More explanations in calculation of productivity is required.

Results: acceptable in current format.

Figures and tables are of good quality.

Discussion: well, discussed the current findings and compared to literature available to authors.

please cite some reference from this journal.

Conclusion: Reflects well the current findings

Any future studies suggested?

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

The authors would like to thank you for your kind comments on the manuscript. You will find the revised manuscript in the attachment. In addition, below you will find the responses to your comments listed point by point:

• Title is appropriate for the manuscript.
• Abstract: Length is suitable for the topic.

-> The authors thank you for these statements.

• Background well reflects the importance of the research, but the aim not well mentioned in this section please edit this part.

-> The aim of this study has been added to the abstract (lines 25-27).

• Introduction: Please recite well the reference you start from reference 1 and directly to Ref No 22! reference should be well arranged.

-> The authors have reorganised the references throughout the manuscript.

• Rationale of the study need to little effort from authors to reflect well the current manuscript.

-> The authors have included the aim of the study in the abstract (lines 25-27). In addition, further explanations were provided in the introduction (lines 91-95).

• Materials and methods: Can be divided into sub-sections (2.1, 2.2 and etc..)

-> The authors have organised the sections as suggested in "Materials and Methods" and "Results".

• More explanations in calculation of productivity is required.

-> Done (lines 264-268)

• Results: acceptable in current format.
• Figures and tables are of good quality.
• Discussion: well, discussed the current findings and compared to literature available to authors.
• Conclusion: Reflects well the current findings

-> The authors thank you for these statements.

• please cite some reference from this journal.

-> The authors have cited some more references from this journal.

• Any future studies suggested?

-> Possible future studies are mentioned in the discussion part (817-830).

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The study deals with the production of biosurfactants, surfactin and fengycin, under different hydrophobic environments. The study is interesting to readers, well organized and systematically written, therefore I suggest to be published in the present form.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,
The authors would like to thank you for your kind comments on the manuscript!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx