Next Article in Journal
Precision of Headwater Stream Permanence Estimates from a Monthly Water Balance Model in the Pacific Northwest, USA
Next Article in Special Issue
Biogeochemical Behavior of Lead and Nickel as Influenced by Phosphatic Fertilizer Applied to Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Cultivars Grown under City Effluent Irrigation
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Tree Planting on Infiltration Dependent on Tree Proximity and Maturity at a Clay Site in Warwickshire, England
Previous Article in Special Issue
Application of BiVO4–Microalgae Combined Treatment to Remove High Concentration Mixture of Sulfamethazine and Sulfadiazine
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Water
Volume 14
Issue 6
10.3390/w14060894
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

Remediation of Chromium (VI) from Groundwater by Metal-Based Biochar under Anaerobic Conditions

Water 2022, 14(6), 894; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14060894
by Yating Jiang 1, Min Dai 2, Fei Yang 1, Imran Ali 3,*, Iffat Naz 4,* and Changsheng Peng 1,2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Water 2022, 14(6), 894; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14060894
Submission received: 18 February 2022 / Revised: 7 March 2022 / Accepted: 9 March 2022 / Published: 12 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Using New and Emerging Technologies to Remove Pollutants in Water/Wastewater)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

-The authors present an extensive and interesting paper conducted to clarify the specific effects of different iron modified biochars for the Cr(VI) removal. The manuscript has a proper structure and in general it is well written. In my opinion, the manuscript needs some work to become suitable for publication.

-It would strengthen the argument on the methodology if it would be clearly stated what is innovative about this specific methodological development.

-Keywords: Metal-based biochar; Cr(VI) remediation; groundwater; Fe(III); Pyrolysis; Cr(VI) 29 reduction and adsorption. Please change some keywords. Tittle and key words must not conntain the same words.

-I susggest to include some potos or diagram of the experiment

I wish those changes will contribute to improve your paper

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

 Dear authors

This work presents the results of the remediation of Chromium (VI) from Groundwater by Metal- based Biochar under Anaerobic Conditions:  In my opinion is  suitable for this journal.

You have put a lot of work in collecting and processing data. The results were presented under a well-structured frame and discussed satisfactory.  It is an effort worthy of publication at this journal after some minor revision listed below :

Replace the title “Results”of  section 3 with the “Results and discussion” one.

Figure 2: Please improve the analysis of  spectra or enlarge  these,  if it is easy.

Conclusions : A conclusion about the tested Fe(ΝΟ3)3@BC lacks, please add.

I am looking forward to see this article published.

Kind regards

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript evaluated the specific effects of different iron modified biochars for the Cr(VI) removal. Overall, the approach of the study is good and could be useful in the public domain, but the manuscript needs considerable revision to reach the public domain. Authors are suggested to address following comments in order to make the manuscript suitable for publication.

* Abstract should be rewritten by detailing the aim and concept of the study. The abstract should state briefly the purpose of the study, the principal results and major conclusions.

*Provide significant words which are more relevant to the work in logical sequence as ‘keywords’. Also use keywords which are not present in title.

* Introduction is very general and need to be elaborative to explore the actual philosophy to design the experiment. The introduction is insufficient to provide the state of the art in the topic. The originality and novelty of the paper need to be further clarified. What progress against the most recent state-of-the-art similar studies was made in this study?

*The introduction of the paper must be extended and reformulated in order to provide a more comprehensive approach.

* Section 2.3; kindly cite the appropriate references properly.

* It would be necessary to develop more bioinformatic/statistical analyses in the present study. 

* Section 3 should be Results and discussion.

*The manuscript does not provide interesting and technically sound discussion; it would be better to use more recent references in discussion.

*Under section, discussion, it is recommended to discuss and explain what should be the appropriate policies based on the findings of this study. Also, the results should be further elaborated to show how they could be used for real applications. 

*Authors are suggested to draw major inferences/primary conclusions first quoting the data/results obtained followed by the secondary conclusions/ recommendations reached through the critical analysis/ investigation of the study. Based on the outcome of the study, the author(s) may recommend the extension of the present study as the future scope of research.

Author Response

Please the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors addressed all the comments, therefore the manuscript may be accepted in the present form. 

Back to TopTop