Dear Dr. Tina,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 18 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

• A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols....

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Marcello Iriti, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.-->--> -->-->Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at -->-->https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and -->-->https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf-->--> -->-->2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:-->--> -->-->GCMS-based phytochemical profiling and in vitro pharmacological activities of plant Alangium salviifolium (L.f) Wang - https://doi.org/10.1186/s43094-024-00631-3-->--> -->-->Phytochemical composition and in vitro antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of Bersama abyssinica F. seed extracts - https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-56659-1-->--> -->-->In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed.-->--> -->-->3. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.-->--> -->-->4. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: -->-->Biology Department, College of Science, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU) (grant number IMSIU-DDRSP2501), Riyadh, 11623, Saudi Arabia  -->--> -->-->Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." -->-->If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. -->-->Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.-->--> -->-->5. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: -->-->This work was supported and funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU) (grant number IM-SIU-DDRSP2501). We gratefully acknowledge the HPC Marwan team for granting us privileged access to their high-performance computing resources. The exceptional computational power and responsive technical support they provided were instrumental in carrying out the molecular-dynamics simulations reported in this study. Their contribution greatly enhanced the quality and robustness of our results, and we are sincerely thankful for their assistance.-->--> -->-->We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. -->-->Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: -->-->Biology Department, College of Science, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU) (grant number IMSIU-DDRSP2501), Riyadh, 11623, Saudi Arabia -->--> -->-->Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.-->--> -->-->6. Please upload a new copy of Figures 1 and 2 as the detail is not clear. Please follow the link for more information:  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures-->--> -->-->7. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. ?>

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Reviewer #1: Manuscript: “Chemical characterization, antimicrobial, and antioxidant potentials of Juniperus phoeniceae wood tar”. Manuscript: “Chemical characterization, antimicrobial, and antioxidant potentials of Juniperus phoeniceae wood tar”. Manuscript: “Chemical characterization, antimicrobial, and antioxidant potentials of Juniperus phoeniceae wood tar”. Manuscript: “Chemical characterization, antimicrobial, and antioxidant potentials of Juniperus phoeniceae wood tar”.

The manuscript provides general information on the antibacterial and antioxidant activities of Juniperus phoenicea wood tar (JPWT), supported by qualitative and quantitative phytochemical analyses. However, it requires thorough English language revision and addressing of the following major issues:

Title

Correct "Juniperus phoeniceae" to “Juniperus phoenicea”. Please go throughout the entire manuscript.

Abstract

Correct "Juniperus phoeniceae" to “Juniperus phoenicea L.” in the first citation.

Rewrite "confirming its free radical-scavenging capability" to "confirming its antioxidant activity." Note that "radical-scavenging capability" is appropriate only when using radicals such as DPPH.

Materials and Methods

Rewrite the sentence "Voucher specimen of JP is deposited in the Herbarium (RAB114890) of the Scientific Institute of Rabat (Morocco) (Branches were examined for integrity and absence of dust and insect contamination)" for clarity and completeness.

Rename section "2.3. Preliminary phytochemical tests" to "2.3. Qualitative phytochemical tests."

Section 2.3.1: Avoid starting sentences with numbers.

Rewrite "After adding 2 mL of distilled water was added to 2 mL ethanolic solution of JPWT" for grammatical accuracy.

Correct "2.4.2. Flavonoid" to "2.4.2. Flavonoids."

Correct "2.4.3. Tannin" to "2.4.3. Tannins."

Correct "2.5.1. 2,2-Diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazylradical assay (DPPH)" to "2.5.1. 2,2-Diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical assay."

Correct "Tests were carried out in triplicate using ascorbic acid and BHT has positive control" to "Tests were carried out in triplicate using ascorbic acid and BHT as positive controls."

Use consistent nomenclature throughout (e.g., J. phoeniceae or JPWT instead of "wood cedar" in section 2.5.1).

Specify the tested microorganisms in the sentence: "A suspension of the tested microorganism (0.5 mL of 106 cells/mL) was spread on nutrient agar."

Define abbreviations in the sentence: "Positive controls were prepared using the CN and IPM antibiotics."

Section 2.7. GC-MS analysis: Clarify how phytocompounds were identified.

Consider switching to HPLC-MS, which is more suitable for polyphenol, alkaloid, and flavonoid-rich extracts.

Define BSTFA.

Results

Correct all "Tableau X" to "Table X" (e.g., Table 1, Table 2… Table 6).

Use decimal points (.) consistently in values for Tables 2 and 3.

In Table 3, specify units for IC50

Section 3.4. GC-MS analysis: Avoid detailing retention times (RT) of identified compounds.

Correct "3.5. Antibacterial stains" to "3.5. Antibacterial activity."

Please insert the sentence "The antibacterial activity of JPWT was tested against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria at concentrations of 25 mg/mL and 50 mg/mL" in the Materials and Methods section.

Italicize scientific names (e.g., Staphylococcus aureus).

Discussion

Remove "Firstly,".

Rewrite "Phytochemical screening revealed the presence of alkaloids, tannins, phenols, and flavonoids (Table 1). Quantification of total phenolics, tannins, and flavonoids (Table 2) by UV-Visible spectroscopy demonstrated that JPWT is rich in these compound", to include in-depth literature-based discussion specific to J. phoeniceae.

Rewrite Table 5 title to "Inhibition zone diameter (mm) of Juniperus phoenicea wood tar and positive controls (antibiotics) against selected bacteria."

Report values in Table 5 as means of three replicates ± standard deviation, with appropriate statistical analysis.

Conclusions

Correct "Collectively, these results position JPWT as a valuable reservoir of bioactive natural products with considerable pharmaceutical and therapeutic promise" for grammatical accuracy and precision.

References

Complete the reference : El Jemli M. "Contribution to the ethnobotanical, toxicological, pharmacological and phytochemical study of four Moroccan Cupressaceae: Juniperus thurifera L., Juniperus oxycedrus L., Juniperus phoenicea L. and Tetraclinis articulata L." (Provide full details: thesis/degree, institution, year, etc., 2020).

Please recheck the whole reference list.

Reviewer #2: Submission ID: PONE-D-25-64294 Submission ID: PONE-D-25-64294 Submission ID: PONE-D-25-64294 Submission ID: PONE-D-25-64294

Journal: PLOS ONE

Dear authors,

Your manuscript entitled “Chemical Characterization, antimicrobial, and antioxidant potentials of Juniperus phoeniceae wood tar” has been reviewed. The topic of your manuscript is very interesting, you are following the right scientific path for writing your manuscript, and the manuscript is well organised and presents important information for the scientific field. However, the manuscript needs some improvements. Therefore, I would like to make some comments, recommendations about the revised manuscript:

• The objective of your research should be discussed in detail in the last paragraph of the introduction.

• What is the importance of adding a Molecular Docking section? Normally, the in-silico study should be carried out before starting the study.

• What is the added value of Molecular Docking for your study?

• The references cited in the Molecular Docking section are not compatible with the contents. Please check these references.

• Add a section for statistical analysis and add the results of the statistical analysis.

• The Discussion section requires a recent reference in the relevant fields and should show the socio-economic importance of your results in relation to those in the literature.

• For the conclusion, present the most important results, the socio-economic importance of the results obtained, as well as recommendations and prospects for your research.

**********

what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy..-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Azeddin EL BARNOSSIAzeddin EL BARNOSSIAzeddin EL BARNOSSIAzeddin EL BARNOSSI

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: plos.docx

Dear Dr. Tina,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 26 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

• A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols....

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Marcello Iriti, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Journal Requirements:

If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: The authors have addressed most of the previous comments, but some points require further revision and clarification. Thorough English language revision is still needed throughout the manuscript.

Reference(s) is needed for this statement: "Among its derivatives, Juniperus phoeniceae wood tar (JPWT), obtained by the destructive distillation of JP wood, is traditionally used for skin ailments and infections."

Correct "Juniperus phoeniceae” in the whole document.

Revise references for qualitative phytochemical tests, ensuring the use of relevant references and correct numbering/formatting according to journal instructions.

Specify the amount of each antibiotic/disc.

State exactly the number of replicates in the Statistical analysis section.

Avoid starting sentences with numbers.

Provide the source/references for the MRSA, ESBL-EC, and CREC strains used in this study, and complete the references for ATCC strains as well.

Revise the chemical composition table, as the percentage areas sum to more than 100%. Clarify how these percentages were calculated and how identification was performed. Add the chromatogram if applicable.

Please include the statistical significance in the tables 3 & 5, rather than in the footnote for greater clarity.

Revise the sequence and order of headings (eg. chemical composition, antioxidant, antibacterial sections) to ensure a logical flow.

Reviewer #2: Manuscript Number: PONE-D-25-64294R1

Journal: PLOS One

Dear authors,

With these significant revisions, I consider the article suitable for publication.

**********

what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy..-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Azeddin EL BARNOSSIAzeddin EL BARNOSSIAzeddin EL BARNOSSIAzeddin EL BARNOSSI

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

Chemical Characterization, antimicrobial, and antioxidant potentials of Juniperus phoenicea wood tar

PONE-D-25-64294R2

Dear Dr. Tina,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support....

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Marcello Iriti, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: Dear authors,

The manuscript has been improved and is worthy of acceptance for publication.

**********

what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy..-->

Reviewer #1: No

**********