Next Article in Journal
Finite Element Model Updating of RC Bridge Structure with Static Load Testing: A Case Study of Vietnamese ThiThac Bridge in Coastal and Marine Environment
Next Article in Special Issue
Development of a New Voltammetric Method for Aceclofenac Determination on Glassy Carbon Electrode Modified with Hierarchical Nanocomposite
Previous Article in Journal
Research on the Derated Power Data Identification Method of a Wind Turbine Based on a Multi-Gaussian–Discrete Joint Probability Model
Previous Article in Special Issue
Development and Analysis of Electrochemical Reactor with Vibrating Functional Element for AAO Nanoporous Membranes Fabrication
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Tuning the Surface Functionality of Fe3O4 for Sensitive and Selective Detection of Heavy Metal Ions

Sensors 2022, 22(22), 8895; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22228895
by Manjunatha Kumara K. S. 1, D. H. Nagaraju 1,*, Zhoveta Yhobu 2, Nayan Kumar H. N. 2, Srinivasa Budagumpi 2, Shubhankar Kumar Bose 2, Shivakumar P. 1 and Venkata Narayana Palakollu 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sensors 2022, 22(22), 8895; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22228895
Submission received: 14 October 2022 / Revised: 8 November 2022 / Accepted: 14 November 2022 / Published: 17 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Design, Fabrication and Sensor Applications of Nano-Electrodes)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Overall: While the work is interesting, they only provide the results of the capability of sensor, and the discussion is rather poor. They need to provide data in concise and prove novelty about their work. I see a lot of spelling mistakes though out (including fig.6) from and address the following comments as this manuscript with the current form isn’t apt.

 

1. page 1, Introduction section, line 35 “Electrochemical methods offer portability, excellent sensitivity, short analysis time, and most importantly low cost”. The advantages are not specific to electrochemical sensors alone, thus I recommend to remove it.

2. Nowhere in the draft authors abbreviated SWASV. What is the rationale behind using this technique? Are there any advantages in GCEs or the type of detection materials (iron oxide)?

3. As shown in Fig.5, the output current has some cross-sensitivity issues. 0.8 uM Cd+2 response syncs with 0.26 uM Pb+2. How do authors justify this cross-sensitivity?

4. In Fig.6e, why is there a difference a difference, authors need to conduct more experiments on the selectivity aspect. In regular water there are minerals that do act as interferons and jeopardize the peaks in Fig. 6a.

5. What is the lifetime of this sensor? Realistically how long can it be effective under shelf storage? How does humidity and temperature effect the measurements? These experiments need to be conducted.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors proposed an electrochemical sensor for heavy metal ions based on Fe3O4-D-Val. And The analytical performance of this sensor is well. However, the paper suffers from several problems that need to be made a minor revision in order to eliminate scientific flaws.

 

1.      The Lattice structure of Fe3O4-D-Val should be characterized by TEM.

2.      The influence of other metals ions, such as Hg2+, Cr3+, Ni2+, Zn2+, should be investigated.

3.      Does the carboxyl group (C=O) be observed in FT-IR spectrum?

4.      The English should be polished.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

This articles is in good shape now, it could be accepted for publication.

Back to TopTop