Preliminary Research on Moss-Based Biocomposites as an Alternative Substrate in Moss Walls

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A very interesting and pertinent work, well structured.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article has average scientific value - it does not show a good solution, and the authors themselves question their conclusions and show that the research has not been completed (ex. ". The growth of moss could not be further investigated because of restriction time, but for more accurate results, further observation over an extended period is recommended."). This article can only be published after major revision and if the title is changed to "preliminary research on [...]" and the authors make the following changes:

1. The article shows an attempt to create a material whose intended use is not fully explained, ex.:
"This study is dedicated to the development of a sustainable alternative for the substrate of an outdoor air purification system employing moss filters, addressing concerns about microplastic leakage from the substrate"

"this research investigates the development of a bio-based material to replace the synthetic filter cloth, consisting mainly of recycled moss fibers from excess moss and moss waste from the moss wall itself."

"Therefore, this study which investigates the use of moss-based biocomposites as an alternative substrate in moss walls for air purification purposes, provides an important addition to on-going research and the state-of-the-art"

Please specify where the manufactured materials are to be used and indicate this clearly in each place.

2. Combine into one chapter "Introduction" and "State-of-the-art in biocomposite materials", shorten and provide the precise purpose of the work at the end of the chapter (as preliminary research).

3.In the chapter "Materials" --> "Natural fiber" describe what concerns the preparation of fibers from chapter 3.2.1

4. In the chapter "Materials" --> "Binders" describe what concerns the preparation of binders from chapter 3.2.1

-whether cellulose or a cellulose source was used? - include this in the descriptions, as they are misleading

-show how starch and metakaolinite were prepared.

5. In the chapter "Methodology" provide the composition of the samples and in the descriptions, pay attention to what was weighed: only cellulose or ground biodegradable plant pots? corn starch or gelatonized corn starch, matakaolin or matakaolin paste?

-In sample markings, provide all contents other than 15 g, i.e., change the description 90/10 - LM to 90/10-LM30, 90/10-LJ to 90/10-LJ5.

6. The discussion of the results and chapter "Conclusion and future research" are very poor - they should be improved and if the article is to be published, it should be written clearly that these are preliminary results.

If the material is to be a substrate for moss to grow, the growth of moss should be observed. If it is to be used to purify the air, no fungi should grow.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is simple and not very scientific, requiring minor transformations.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper aimed to characterize the Moss-based biocomposites as an alternative substrate in moss walls .However, this manuscript should be revised carefully before publication. My comments are listed in the following:

1. Page 1，It is recommended to unify the keyword format.

2. Page 5，In Table 1, the ratio of experimental samples, it is recommended to add long moss fibers and long jute fibers under the condition of 100% moss

3. Page 9, Figure 5. Whether a better sample can be obtained if the long fibers are evenly dispersed

4. Page 12, It is mentioned in 4.5 that the fungus growth is observed on the plate, moss culture is performed on the sample after elimination, and whether the fungus will continue to grow during the culture process

5. Page 12, No significant moss growth was observed and whether it can be shown by other means that the sample does not affect moss growth

6. Water retention as an important performance of the biological board, continue to reduce the amount of metakaolin, can we find samples with high tensile strength and high water retention?

7. It is suggested to add various studies on sample durability in the experiment

8. Please unify the format of the references

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors Thank you for the corrections, the article can be published in its current form.