Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In general, the authors significantly improved the quality of the manuscript and I accept all the responses to my questions. However, there are still some details that should be corrected before publishing.

 

Lines 222-224: The samples were analyzed on an Agilent Technologies LC 1290 and MS/MS 6495 kit, on a Waters Xbridge C18 column 4.6 x 100 mm, 3.5 μm with a pre-filter and 50 nm3 feed volume - This is a very weird formulation. I guess micropollutants were measured with Agilent 1290 Infinity II UHPLC system coupled to an Agilent 6495 Triple Quadrupole MS system using a Waters Xbridge C18 column (4.6 x 100 mm, particle size 3.5 μm) supplemented with a pre-column, with an injection volume of 50 µL (nobody uses in this case a unit of nm³).  

 

Line 231: As far as I know the term ‘check’ is a colloquial formulation. I would replace it with ‘quality control samples’

 

Line 238: ‘detection limit, i.e. we do not know their specific values’ – second art of the sentence it’s not necessary, that’s a common term that does not require an explanation

 

Formatting of Table 2A, 3A, 4A should be improved:

• The number should be justified/centered
• When applicable the full words should be in one line
• The width of the columns should be adjusted to the content

 

Line 315 and 325, 353, 448, 451, 462, 467 etc. – numbers and their units should be in the same lines

 

Keep the complete table on the one page if possible (e.g. Table 5B)

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Your text is improved. I think after the minor correction can be published. There is something wrong with table 2A and 4A,and why you add detection limits in those tables. Detection limits are also in tables 1A and 1B? Please check the use of comma as a thousand separator for example row 333 you do not use it. The quality of figures is not very good. May be try to past it into text in a different form? Table 6. Row “Progesterone” you have comma instead of dot. Row 514 How do you measure such a small flow in a stream. I am just curious.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf