Bioscorodite Production from As(III) and Fe(II) Salts under Oxidizing and Acidic Conditions of Trichoderma atroviride Culture
, Refugio Rodríguez-Vázquez 1,*, Ricardo Aguilar-López 1 and José Roberto Zúñiga-Silva 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the present article, the authors have studied the removal of arsenic via fungal culture. The article deals with an exciting topic. A major revision is recommended before it can be accepted for publication:
i. Is the application of bioscorodite or its disposal explained in the manuscript? Include in abstract also.
ii. You can also include arsenic concentration data of other countries also (Table 1). That will help in worldwide recognition of the problem.
iii. Is the data included in Table 1 recent one?
iv. Improve resolution of figure 1.
v. Improvise the conclusion by including future research ideas.
Author Response
- Is the application of bioscorodite or its disposal explained in the manuscript? Include in abstract also.
Answer:
This is an important question, however we were not able to suggest an application, since additional toxicity studies are necessary in order to suggest a possible application.
- You can also include arsenic concentration data of other countries also (Table 1). That will help in worldwide recognition of the problem.
Answer: Information of Table 1 was changed for international information (Line 57 and 59- 66)
iii. Is the data included in Table 1 recent one?
Answer: Yes, (Lines 59– 66)
In fact we changed the Mexican information for an international information (year 2002).
Line 57
- Improve resolution of figure 1.
Answer: Than you, It was improved
- Improvise the conclusion by including future research ideas.
Answer: Conclusions were improved (Lines 575-578) and future research ideas were also included previously (Lines 586-592)
Please see the attach file, also I have the invoice and receipt of the english editing work performed by the International Science Editing.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article "Bioscorodite Production from As(III) and Fe(II) Salts under 2 Oxidizing and Acidic Conditions of Trichoderma atroviride Culture" investigates the ability of Trichoderma atroviride culture to reduce pH and increase Eh under selected conditions, resulting in the formation of bioscorodite and removal of arsenic from water. The article has scientific and practical value, but it needs to be heavily revised before publication. Here are the main points:
1. Publications 3, 7, 23, 29 are in Spanish. English translation required.
2. Where does the conclusion in lines 167-170 come from (not evident from Figure 1). It is necessary to comment more deeply how it was decided that only A. niger fitted a logistic regression model (R2 = 0.99).
3. The sign shown in line 187 is unclear > ~ pH. Need to clarify.
4. The formulas are written inaccurately (MnSO4.H2O). The multiplication sign must be above.
5. Lines 191-194 and 308-316 describe the methodology (it should have been in Chapter 2).
6. A deeper Fig. 1 is missing comment.
7. Where does the conclusion come from page 211?
8. It is unclear why figures 2-5 show a different number of culture parameters.
9. Figure 6, 7, 8 - poor quality, it is not clear what is on the x-axis.
Author Response
Thank you for your kind questions
- Publications 3, 7, 23, 29 are in Spanish. English translation required.
Answer: We made the translation of references 3,7, and 29;
Also we included the reference 23 in english.
We also updated reference 4 to a source that includes the concentration of arsenic worldwide, rather than just in Mexico.
This change is reflected in the text, and we have provided a brief explanation of the updated reference. Lines 59-66
- Where does the conclusion in lines 167-170 come from (not evident from Figure 1). It is necessary to comment more deeply how it was decided that only A. niger fitted a logistic regression model (R2= 0.99).
Answer: To explain the conclusion I added the following:
The growth rate of the four fungi was tested using both the first-order and logistic models, with data collected up to 8 days of cultivation. The results showed that only A. niger was well-fitted by the logistic regression model (R2=0.99), (Equation 1). The R2 value was lower for P. chrysosporium, at only 0.74. Lines 229-232
- The sign shown in line 187 is unclear > ~ pH. Need to clarify.
Answer: The sign ~ was ommitted
- The formulas are written inaccurately (MnSO4.H2O). The multiplication sign must be above.
Answer: The sign was changed and inserted above, in lines 85 and 86, and it was changed throughout the entire manuscript (including in the section of the results).
- Lines 191-194 and 308-316 describe the methodology (it should have been in Chapter 2).
Answer: It was changed to 2.2. in Chapter 2.
- A deeper Fig. 1 is missing comment.
Answer: It resolution was enhanced and also a more appropiated explanation was given, as follows, same answer as previous:
The growth rate of the four fungi was tested using both the first-order and logistic models, with data collected up to 8 days of cultivation. The results showed that only A. niger was well-fitted by the logistic regression model (R2=0.99), (Equation 1). The R2 value was lower for P. chrysosporium, at only 0.74.
- Where does the conclusion come from page 211?
Answer: It was explained that the H2O2 produced by the fungi (Figure 1(c )), was produced by the glucose oxidase (Figure 1 (d)), The H2O2 spontaneously generates the hydroxyl radical (●OH), as it is explained in the manuscript, lines 270-277 .
- It is unclear why figures 2-5 show a different number of culture parameters.
Answer: I am not sure if I understood the question:
- a) If you are asking about the diferent temperature or culture medium,
The answer is: Because each fungus requires diferent culture conditions and also nutrients, For example, the basidiomycete Phanerochaete chrysosporium, grows at temperature of 39 C.
b ) If the question is referred to the fact that some culture parameters were not included in the graphics?.
The answer is: We did not observe significant diferences between the treatments in some of the parameters.
- Figure 6, 7, 8 - poor quality, it is not clear what is on the x-axis.
Answer: These figures were changed.
Please see the attach file (corrected manuscript
I want to mention that the anuscript was previously sent for the english editing work to International Science Editing as it can be seen in the invoice and receipt.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript titled Bioscorodite Production from As(III) and Fe(II) Salts under Oxidizing and Acidic Conditions of Trichoderma atroviride culture addresses the Bioscorodite Production which could be useful for the removal of arsenic. This issue is of an increasing importance in the current scientific literature. The paper is a competent study raising some interesting knowledge and can be accepted after a few changes. Overall, English language is very poor. It should be read by native English speaker. The following comments can improve the quality of the manuscript.
· Abstract: Add sentences about arsenic issue in the abstract section.
· Improve conclusion in the abstract section.
· The introduction section needs to be improved by presenting novel findings relevant to contamination of As in environment around the world.
· Scientists considered the removal technology based on selectivity, sensitivity, cost-effectiveness, and so on. This needs to be indicated such a point in manuscript.
· The problem statement is weak and the significance of using cockle shell is not explained sufficiently. Previous data about use of such materials should be added from various countries.
· The objectives are not clearly mentioned. They must be explained expressively.
· Importance of using Bioscorodite and its cost-effectiveness should be discussed.
· The materials characterization is not sufficient. The morphology needs to be added and then compared with reported materials. FTIR data should also be included since it identifies the functional groups responsible for arsenic removal
Author Response
3 Reviewer
3Open Review
( ) I would not like to sign my review report
(x) I would like to sign my review report
Quality of English Language
(x) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible
( ) Extensive editing of English language and style required
( ) Moderate English changes required
( ) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required
( ) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The manuscript titled Bioscorodite Production from As(III) and Fe(II) Salts under Oxidizing and Acidic Conditions of Trichoderma atroviride culture addresses the Bioscorodite Production which could be useful for the removal of arsenic. This issue is of an increasing importance in the current scientific literature. The paper is a competent study raising some interesting knowledge and can be accepted after a few changes. Overall, English language is very poor. It should be read by native English speaker. The following comments can improve the quality of the manuscript.
- Abstract: Add sentences about arsenic issue in the abstract section.
Answer: Thank you for your kind suggestions to improve the manuscript.
It was included
- Improve conclusion in the abstract section.
Answer:
It was included
- The introduction section needs to be improved by presenting novel findings relevant to contamination of As in environment around the world.
Answer: It was included, lines
- Scientists considered the removal technology based on selectivity, sensitivity, cost-effectiveness, and so on. This needs to be indicated such a point in manuscript.
Answer:
We included that low temperatures are not required for fungal growth, no chemicals are needed (acids and oxidants like H2O2 that are used for waste water treatment contaminated with arsenic.
- The problem statement is weak and the significance of using cockle shell is not explained sufficiently. Previous data about use of such materials should be added from various countries.
- The objectives are not clearly mentioned. They must be explained expressively.
Answer: It was attended, in lines
- Importance of using Bioscorodite and its cost-effectiveness should be discussed.
Answer: Until now more research is in the way specifically related to the evaluation of the toxicity, therefore we will consider your suggestion for the further research. Thank you
- The materials characterization is not sufficient. The morphology needs to be added and then compared with reported materials. FTIR data should also be included since it identifies the functional groups responsible for arsenic removal
Answer: The characterization of bioscorodite was explained in more detail, and compared to other biscorodites produced with bacteria. (Lines 489-505; 508-510; 547-552; 560-566)
Additionally we explained the pathway for the oxidation of the As(III) to As(V) by the selected fungi, and the As reduction, I am sorry that we couldn’t go in more detail in the characterization, using another techniques.
Please see the attached file, (corrected mansucript).
Note: I want to mention that the manuscript was sent for english editing work, invoice No. ISE25441 and receipt No. ISE24080 given by the International Science Editing (Maybe we made some mistakes during the revision, that make not easy the understanding of the manuscript) .
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The article has been substantially improved. It can now be accepted for publication.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article “Bioscorodite production from As(III) and Fe(II) salts under oxidizing 3 and acidic conditions of Trichoderma atroviride culture” has been properly edited and is ready for publication.
