Responding to the comments of reviewers

Responses to the comments of reviewers must be clear and reasonable.

Example of responses

Comment 1: Importance of the work is not well shown in the Introduction of the article. Most part of Introduction incudes information about importance of a whole scientific field, which should be cut to one paragraph. Authors should describe data and articles in the narrow field of study - synthesis of siver nanoparticles and show their drawbacks and problems. 

Response: We agree with the comment. Introduction has been re-written. Detailed analysis of publications in the field of silver nanoparticles synthesis has been made. Twelve new citations to most important publications have been added to the article.

Comment 2: I think that additional experiments must be done to study the effect of temperature on a size of silver nanoparticles. These studies would allow authors to obtain particle sizes in the range of 20-50 nm.

Response: We do not agree with the reviewer. Effect of a temperature on a size of silver nanoparticles has been studied by other scientists [10, 12 и 15]. According to these publications, increase of the temperature negatively affects stability of nanoparticles, which tend to aggregate.