Review of an article submitted to the conference

Approval status: Accept after acknowledging of remarks
Date Published: 02.05.2019 - 18:48
Article’s title 
The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article? 
Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished? 
Does the article embrace contemporary issues in the area? 
Does the article contain new and not published results? 
Was the article clearly written and easily understood? 
Understood with effort
Conclusions illustrate the research results, recommendations and giving suggestions for future research 
The references are full and grounded? 
How adequate was the writing and used terminology? 
Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article 

1. Since 3 authors are from the same department, there is no need to write the same name of department and university 3 times. Its better to write it one time and use the same reference number of the department to all 3 authors.
2. Space between abstract and keywords is missing.
3. It would be better to use shorter sentences to make it easier to understand the text.
4. On page 2, last paragraph, line 4 the data of the concentration value is missing.
5. References [1, 2, 3] from the list of references have to be mentioned in the text of abstract.

I confirm that there is no conflict of interests regarding reviewed article. 
I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have insignificant reservations, as outlined above.