Next Article in Journal
New Advances in Aerobic Granular Sludge Technology Using Continuous Flow Reactors: Engineering and Microbiological Aspects
Next Article in Special Issue
Diversity and Activity of Aquatic Cellulolytic Bacteria Isolated from Sedimentary Water in the Littoral Zone of Tonle Sap Lake, Cambodia
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring the Spatial Impact of Green Infrastructure on Urban Drainage Resilience
Previous Article in Special Issue
Microbial Biofilm Diversity and Prevalence of Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Drinking Water Distribution System of Peshawar, Pakistan
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Water
Volume 13
Issue 13
10.3390/w13131791
Review Report
water-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Application of Polyaluminium Chloride Coagulant in Urban River Water Treatment Influenced the Microbial Community in River Sediment

Water 2021, 13(13), 1791; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131791
by Siyu Liu 1,†, Xuchao Zhuang 2,† and Chuandong Wang 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Water 2021, 13(13), 1791; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131791
Submission received: 31 May 2021 / Revised: 26 June 2021 / Accepted: 27 June 2021 / Published: 29 June 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Microbial Communities in Water Environments: Dynamics and Interaction)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors, please find the detailed comments in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very timely and informative paper. However, why was only one sample site (A1) selected in the Beitang River?  
The results section under physiochemical properties needs to be more detained, use specific numbers or something where the reader does not have to always look at the tables to follow.  Lack of details in the paragraph interrupts the flow.  For instance the author says the River was turbid.  What exactly does that mean especially when the turbidity was actually measured.  
Line 97…”using” instead of “used”

Line 147…Delete “Besides” and the “,” after reduced.

Line 151…Metals increased to what.  The author could have given a range of values within the paragraph.  Again, this makes the reader generalize the values and then have to go find in the table.

Could the supplementary table for the alpha diversity be in the paper or is there space limitation?

Line 241….Begin the sentence with full name  for RDA

Overall the paper is detailed with sufficient analysis.  There is just the question about the sampling the design of not having more than one sampling site from the Beitang River.  Also, just making the results sections more detailed so that the paper flows better.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The methodology requires minor corrections. Mark the places of coagulant dosing on the map. Why is point A1 taken as a reference?

Whether the differences in the depth of the river cannot affect the parameters tested, both physico-chemical and microbiological - please add the results in the discussion. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop