Lavandula Luisieri and Lavandula Viridis Essential Oils as Upcoming Anti-Protozoal Agents: A Key Focus on Leishmaniasis
, Natália Martins 3,4,*, Lígia Salgueiro 5,6, Carlos Cavaleiro 5,6 and Maria C. Sousa 5,7Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Searching active component from essential oils is a popular strategy for Leishmaniasis treatment. In this manuscript, the authors tested the anti-Leishmania activity of L. luisieri and L. viridis EO and their main components. Among these, Lavandula luisieri showed potent activity against L. infantum, L. tropica and L. major, respectively. The author also did a comprehensive mechanism study and revealed a complex anti-Leishmania process but mainly depending on apoptosis-related aspects. Overall, this manuscript is well organized and suitable for published in Appl. Sci. after the following concerns being addressed:
1. In table 2, Lavandula luisieri showed potent activity, but the four components are inactive at all. It seems the author did find the active component of luisieri. This reviewer suggest the author to test the activity of other components, such as Necrodane derivatives and Lavandulyl acetate, which are also the main components.
2. The statement ”n.a” is misleading, this reviewer suggest the author depict the exact tested concentrations and the inhibition rate.
3. The description about the cytotoxicity in normal cell is too brief. The author should provide the detailed data and the Selectivity Index.
Author Response
Searching active component from essential oils is a popular strategy for Leishmaniasis treatment. In this manuscript, the authors tested the anti-Leishmania activity of L. luisieri and L. viridis EO and their main components. Among these, Lavandula luisieri showed potent activity against L. infantum, L. tropica and L. major, respectively. The author also did a comprehensive mechanism study and revealed a complex anti-Leishmania process but mainly depending on apoptosis-related aspects. Overall, this manuscript is well organized and suitable for published in Appl. Sci. after the following concerns being addressed:
1. In table 2, Lavandula luisieri showed potent activity, but the four components are inactive at all. It seems the author did find the active component of luisieri. This reviewer suggest the author to test the activity of other components, such as Necrodane derivatives and Lavandulyl acetate, which are also the main components.
Answer: Regarding the Necrodane derivatives, a fractionation and fraction analysis work is being carried out to identify the compounds, as they are not available commercially. Lavandulyl acetate was not available at lab and in literature it has not revealed an interesting biological activity.
2. The statement ”n.a” is misleading, this reviewer suggest the author depict the exact tested concentrations and the inhibition rate.
Answer: The aspect highlighted by the reviewer was carefully addressed in the revised version of the manuscript.
3. The description about the cytotoxicity in normal cell is too brief. The author should provide the detailed data and the Selectivity Index.
Answer: The aspect highlighted by the reviewer was included in the current version of the manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript considers an interesting topic, which will be a valuable content as a publication in Applied Sciences. The manuscript provids results of invesigation on L. luisieri and L. viridis. impact of Leishmania species, what is highly interesting approach, especially in times of drug-resistant microorganism.
The strenght of this manuscript is a wide range of applied evaluation techniques and appropriate language. Nevertheless, the manuscript needs to be improved before publication in the case of methods, presentation of the results and discussion. Some, unclearly presented contents strongly decrease the value of this work.
My comments are included in attach pdf. file.
I’m willing to review the revised manuscript
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
The manuscript considers an interesting topic, which will be a valuable content as a publication in Applied Sciences. The manuscript provids results of invesigation on L. luisieri and L. viridis. impact of Leishmania species, what is highly interesting approach, especially in times of drug-resistant microorganism.
The strenght of this manuscript is a wide range of applied evaluation techniques and appropriate language. Nevertheless, the manuscript needs to be improved before publication in the case of methods, presentation of the results and discussion. Some, unclearly presented contents strongly decrease the value of this work.
My comments are included in attach pdf. file. I’m willing to review the revised manuscript
Answer: Thanks. All the reviewer comments were carefully addressed in the revised version of the manuscript.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for consideration of my comments. I am satisfied with your improvments. I still encurage you to add the information about the 1,8-cineole and borneol activity investigation at the proofreading step, regarding that you done it in your recent study. Nevertheless, I think your manuscript performes high quality study and scientific disscussion.
Author Response
Thank you for the overall appreciation of our work. The suggested aspect was also included.
