The Formulation of Dermato-Cosmetic Products Using Sanguisorba minor Scop. Extract with Powerful Antioxidant Capacities
, Adriana Ramona Memete 2, Mariana Ganea 3,*, Laura Graţiela Vicaș 3, Octavia Dorina Gligor 4 and Simona Ioana Vicas 1,2,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled "Sanguisorba minor Scop., a valuable source of natural bioactive compounds with high antioxidant capacity, as potential application in the cosmetic field" provides a comprehensive assessment of the potential of S. minor roots, leaves and flowers as a potential cosmetic ingredient and characterizes three different cosmetic formulations incorporating the extracts of S. minor. The manuscript is well-written and properly organized. However, some questions/comments are stated below and should be addressed to improve the overall quality of the manuscript:
1. Title: Please consider revising the title.
2. Abstract: Please include some results obtained.
3. Introduction: In the last paragraph, please consider highlighting the novelty of the study considering the literature already available on this research topic.
4. Methods: In section 2.1, was the plant material milled before the extraction? What was the procedure after air-dry the plant material? Please indicate it.
5. Methods: The section 2.3 should be placed as the first section in the methods. Also, in this section, the company that supplies all reagents should be indicated followed by city, state (if applicable) and country. Please revise it along the manuscript for all reagents and also all equipments used.
6. Methods: Please indicate the concentrations tested for the standards used and the equation and R2 of the calibration curves (lines 210-211, 218-220, and 228-229).
7. Methods: In subsection 2.8, please revise the methodology described for Franz cell assays. Was human skin used? If yes, how was it provided? And how was the skin treated? Also, what was the protocol approval code and respective institution responsible for it? Regarding the aliquots taken at fixed times, what were the volumes? Please present all this information. In addition, please describe briefly the Folin-Ciocalteu method employed.
8. Methods: In subsection 2.9, how many volunteers participated in the sensory analysis? More information about the volunteers (age, sex) should be provided as well as the location where the sensory evaluation was performed. Also, it is not clear if all volunteers applied the three products and the part of the body where the products were applied.
9. Why did the authors not evaluate the phytochemical composition of the S. minor roots, leaves and flower extracts by HPLC analysis? This could be very helpful to support the antioxidant properties demonstrated.
10. Statistical analysis is missing in Tables 4, 5, 6 and Figure 3
11. In Table 5, for pH, viscosity, density, and moisture and volatile substances, besides statistical analysis, it is also missing the standard deviation. Please provide it.
12. Discussion needs to be improved by comparing with the existing literature in this research topic.
13. In Figure 3, it is missing the error bars regarding the standard deviation.
14. Conclusions: Based on all findings, if you have to choose one formulation, what would it be? Please justify. In addition, consider discussing some future perspectives on this research topic.
15. The list of references is missing at the end of the manuscript. Please provide it and format them following the journal guidelines.
16. Please revise the formatting of the manuscript (for example, some spaces are needed).
Minor comments:
- Line 18: The word "characteristics" is repeated twice. Please revise it.
- Line 23: In keywords, correct the word "cosmetics".
- References cited along the manuscript are formatted in bold. Please remove the bold for all references.
- In line 73, format "p" from "p-coumaroylquinic acid" in italic letter.
- In line 102, replace "1 : 10 ratio (g/v)" by "1 : 10 ratio (w/v)".
- In line 135, add a space between number and unit, rewriting as "80 °C". Please revise it along the manuscript for similar mistakes.
- In the papers mentioned along the manuscript as "Apak et al. 2004", please avoid indicating the year by rewriting it as "Apak et al." followed by the respective reference in numbered style.
- In lines 224-225, format "-2" from "(1 × 10−2 M)" and "-3" from "(7.5 ×10−3 M)" in superscript (or above the line).
- Reformat the equations presented in lines 196 and 234 following the journal guidelines.
- In line 240, correct the word "Physico-chemical" and revise it for all manuscript.
- In line 257, please format "-1" from "1312.0 s-1" in superscript (or above the line).
- In line 321, format "S. minor" in italic letter.
- Tables and Figures should be placed immediately after they are first mentioned in the manuscript.
- In Figure 4, correct the word "absorption".
- In lines 445-446, add at least one reference to support this statement.
- In line 480, format "Ocimum basilicum" and "Trifolium pratense" in italic letter.
- In line 482, format "in vivo" in italic letter.
- In line 519-520, format "S. minor" in italic letter.
- In line 523, replace "development" by "developed".
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Happy New Year 2024!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. In introduction, you need to explain why anti-oxidant is needed for cosmetic formulation.
2. At Table 2, in composition, ethanolic extract of S. minor--> it should be better whether exctrast are solid form or liquid form. From your experimental step, it was removed ethanol by rotary evaporator., but not mentioned final phase.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Happy New Year 2024!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn general, the authors addressed the questions and comments made by the reviewer. Some minor questions and comments stated below should be additionally addressed:
- In section 2.2, regarding the plant material (lines 149-150): The authors stated that the plant material was milled before extraction. What was the pore size after milling? Please indicate it if possible along with the company and model of the coffee grinder used (line 149).
- In section 2.8: Why were synthetic membranes used to evaluate in vitro polyphenols release from topical dermato-cosmetic formulas? If the authors desire a cosmetic application, the use of skin would be more suitable. Please justify it.
- Please avoid using abbreviations in the titles of sections (e.g., section 2.9, line 396).
- Please revise the references from the list at the end of the manuscript. For example, in reference 5, the scientific name "Cistus ladanifer" should be formatted in italic letter. Also, in some references, the journal name is indicated in full form, while in other references it is indicated in the abbreviated form. Revise all references for similar mistakes.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors addressed all questions and comments made by the reviewer. The manuscript seems now in conditions to be considered for publication in Cosmetics journal.
