Removing Sr(II) and Cs(I) from the Aqueous Phase Using Basil Seed and Elucidating the Adsorption Mechanism
, Chalermpong Saenjum 2,3, Takehiro Nakamura 1 and Naohito Kawasaki 1,4,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study investigated Removing Sr (II) and Cs (I) from the aqueous phase using basil seed and elucidating the adsorption mechanism. Some of issues should be addressed.
- The authors stated that BS was greater than that of enzymatic treated BS, indicating that glucomannan or (1,4)-xylan in cellulosic hydrocolloid of the BS strongly affected to the adsorption capability of Cs(I) or Sr(II). However, as indicated in Fig 8, the adsorption capacities of BS and M-BS were about the same. The authors might have to elaborate or modified the statement.
- The authors might have to provide more evidence or reference to support the adsorption mechanism of Sr(II) or Cs(I) by cellulose-hemicellulosic polysaccharide composite presented in Figure 7.
- Line 140, “the amount of Sr(II) adsorbed was greater than that of Cs(I) adsorbed”. The potential reasons of this result might have to be presented.
- More comprehensive discussion of findings in this study would be required.
- The potential drawbacks or limitation of the methods should be addressed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
The research presented is, with respect to the material analysed - basil seeds and their calcinated forms - original. However, the relevance of the study is not obvious for this particular journal, rather it would be suited in an organic chemistry journal.
There are a lot of materials containing cellulose and hemicellulose that can act as adsorbents. Furthermore, the adsorbing capacity of basil seed mucilage is quite well known for many chemical elements and their compounds.
How does basil seeds relate to sustainability, considering that, generally, basil seeds are not a byproduct or a waste material?
The authors should integrate at least economical data on basil seed production, availability and costs, in order to get close to the journal scope.
Please also check the spelling of biological taxonomical units, such as Rhizopus nigricans in page 5, row 4 and Gracillaria in a subsequent table - they should be also italicized.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The replies from the authors are satisfactory.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
The introduction was improved in terms of content. However, in the revised paper, there still are spelling issues, such as those in lines 156 and 157. What do the authors mean by "phizopus nigricans"? Also, "gracilaria corticata" appears without italics in the first instance, then, in the below table, it appears italicized and properly capitalized.
The authors could state what was the number of replicates used in the experiments. Line 116 mentions n=2-3, but what is that number, technical replicates, number of experiments?
Author Response
Please see the attachement.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
