Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. A few syntax and grammatical errors need to be fixed.
2. Line 25-27:  Biological treatment mainly removes inorganic contaminants. Really??
3. Abbreviations should be in full for first-time use; Line 54, 57
4. What is the significance of figure 1?
5. What significant contribution is this review?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I have addressed all the recommendations suggested, find the attached manuscript.

Regards

Dr. Mpongwana

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript "Exploiting biofilm characteristics to enhance biological nutrient removal in the wastewater treatment plant" is a review on the properties of biofilms that can be exploited to enhance the biological wastewater system. This is a hot topic and the present work can add information to the field. Therefore, the publication is recommended; but after some revisions, as follows:

- Abstract. Add the main findings/conclusions of the work also in this section.

- Introduction. Add other recent works to enlarge the state of the art. For this purpose, see for instance: Somma et al., ChemEngineering, 2021, 5(3), 47; Gul Zaman et al., Materials, 2021, 14(24), 7607; etc...

- Follow the journal template for the text;

- Correct typos;

- Add a table showing the application and the impact of the different methods reviewed;

- Add an abbreviation list.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I have addressed all the recommendations suggested, find the attached manuscript.

Regards

Dr. Mpongwana

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

My comments to manuscript, Title " Exploiting biofilm characteristics to enhance biological nutrient removal in the wastewater treatment plant” are given below.

1.       The abbreviation must present firstly with its full mane. Then it can be used the abbreviation with out the full name. Please check and revise carefully throughout the manuscript. Due to there are many abbreviations presenting in the manuscript thus I suggest having a nomenclature list.

2.       There is a problem of the presenting of Fig.1 in the file for reviewer, thus I cannot give comments to Fig.1 clearly. However, the principle or description of aerobic and anaerobic treatment system are required for explaining Fig.1.

3.       There are 2 of Fig.1, please check and revise the figure number.  Moreover, all figure number or Table should be mentioned in the text for example: as shown in Fig.2, Fig. 2 presents…..

4.       I suggest putting the illustrations of 1) the bioreactor configuration for biofilm 2) the shape of carriers

5.       To make the reader more understanding, I suggest creating the summary Table of some issues for example 1) the performance of using biofilm technology compare with another technologies 2) The advantages and disadvantages of using biofilm technology compare with another technologies    3) the comparison of performances of using methods to improve the biofilm technology   4) The advantages and disadvantages using methods to improve of biofilm technology  5) the popular carrier type and their properties have been used for the biofilm technologies

6.       Beside the criteria to improve the biofilm technologies that the author present, are there other issues affecting the biofilm improvement for example, the organic loading rate, feed flow rate, stirring speed or shear rate, temperature, pH, oxygen concentration….

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I have addressed all the recommendations suggested, find the attached manuscript.

Regards

Dr. Mpongwana

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

-