Next Article in Journal
Negotiating Sustainability Transitions: Why Does It Matter? What Are the Challenges? How to Proceed?
Previous Article in Journal
Climate Change—Between “Myth and Truth” in Romanian Farmers’ Perception
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Enhanced Phosphorus Recovery as Vivianite from Anaerobically Digested Sewage Sludge with Magnetic Biochar Addition

Sustainability 2022, 14(14), 8690; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148690
by Yuan Liu *, Jie Jin, Jiawei Li, Ziwei Zou, Renchan Lei, Jintao Sun and Jinxia Xia
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Sustainability 2022, 14(14), 8690; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148690
Submission received: 25 June 2022 / Revised: 12 July 2022 / Accepted: 14 July 2022 / Published: 15 July 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please Find attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

We sincerely thank the editor and all reviewers for their constructive comments to improve our manuscript. We have carefully revised our manuscript as suggested. Thus, the clarity of the manuscript was significantly improved. Please see our point-to-point responses in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review a paper entitled: "Enhanced phosphorus recovery as vivianite from anaerobically digested sewage sludge with magnetic biochar addition."

 

The paper's topic is of interest and imposrtant since the dwindling supply of phosphorous is observed in worldwide agriculture. The writing of the manuscript is proper and understandable.

 

Minor remarks: Line 30, abstract - remove the space between number and Celcius.

Introduction: the technical part of the introduction is adequately written. However, the first paragraph could be expanded - showcasing how large the problem with dwindling phosphorus content in soils and/or problems with introducing new emerging contaminants to soil with sewage sludge application could bring a broader spectrum of readers to the authors' paper. Some of the references are quite old, and both in the introduction as well as in the discussion section, the manuscript would benefit greatly by adding more recent papers. 

 

The materials, methods, and results are very clear and detailed. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

We sincerely thank the editor and all reviewers for their constructive comments to improve our manuscript. We have carefully revised our manuscript as suggested. Thus, the clarity of the manuscript was significantly improved. Please see our point-to-point responses in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop