Dear Dr. Okwueze

your paper has now been reviewed by four experts who provided two review comments (one review has three contributors!).  These reviews are overall very positive, but some modification of the paper is requested.  In particular expansion of discussion and a completer reporting of the data set are requested. The literature on the topic seems quite extensive and it suggested you place your new findings in the context or previous publications, more than it is now.

Please have a look at these reviews/comments and let me know how you will respond to them. A brief statement suffices. If you think you can modify the paper in such a way that others will not come up with the same concerns/queries/questions, you can proceed with the revision.  However, first I would like to know if you can take the comments into account when revising the manuscript.

(Clare Warren originally handled the manuscript. She stepped down as an Associate Editor due to other commitments. This is why I am handling your paper now.)

With kind regards

Klaus Mezger

Dear authors

Thank your for your response to the review comments. I think the suggestions you make take into considerations all the comments provided by the reviewer and will lead to a clearer and improved manuscript.

I have a few technical comments you might consider when making the revisions.

The reply is largely written in the I-form, although the paper has three authors.  This indicates that the other authors will not take part in the revisions. However, our journal requires that ALL authors have approved the submission of a manuscript and to do so they must have read it.

I think the word "believe" has no place in a scientific paper.  Scientists do not "believe", they consider, interpret, suggest, conclude.....

Please report data properly  The decimal places of the errors should match the decimal places of data.

Please make the modifications suggested and submit a revised and improved paper soon

With kind regards

Klaus Mezger