Highly Efficient Adsorption Characteristics and Mechanism of Nutshell Biochars for Aromatic Organophosphorus Insecticides

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

This work presents interesting materials and their use in environmental studies. In my opinion, the authors performed a lot of details to present the draft in this form. However, some issues need to be addressed as follows:

The font type and size need to be uniform. The equations that are fully presented in the supplementary materials need to be fully presented in the main text - please, add the legend in the main text.

line 126 is the same as line 123

167-178 lines – how was BET measured - by using N2, or CO2? It could be helpful to show a pores distribution. Rice stalks, rice hulls, corn stalks, bamboo, and wood aren’t described in the text.

The experimental result shows the maximal value of the average pore 5.4 nm, while the different materials may have different pores. Please show the results for mezopores.

Figure 2b please show the standard deviation.

253 -285 line – (tables 3) - pseudo-first kinetic order is not included. Please compare the R2 coefficient for all samples, especially for wood and rice hulls. Please, change the isotherm for non-linear equation and fitting. For samples where Qmax is 0 please fit other models of isotherm, like Redlich-Peterson and others., so it is neeed to calculate n factors and show the value, not 1/n.

Please define the difference between the and walnut shell - in some places there is no difference.

284 – 304 – describe other materials that were used. Description is presented only for one sample.

305- 315 – absence comparison between results

316-326 ACN is NOT ecofriendly solvent This solvent is cancerogenic and CANNOT BE proposed as an ecofriendly. No matter how you use it - it will get easily to the environment.

Fig 3 – please change the font in wavenumber

Conclusion – It should be extended, where the broaden range of isotherms should be proposed.

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The current form of this manuscript was well written and well organized, but it requires a modification to bring it to a level suitable for publication in a journal of this caliber. It is therefore I recommend a major revision. My decision is based on the following observations, which should be addressed before resubmitting to get a good form for your manuscript:

1.      Abstract and conclusion sections need more organized and rewritten with clarification the work novelty.

2.      I recommend authors to perform more characterization, such as EDX, and TGA.

3.      Figures need more modification.

4.      Recycling part needs more investigations, How many cycles you can use the nutshell biochar adsorbent.

5.       I recommend authors to clarify the adsorption mechanism in a separate subtitle, with providing a schematic design.

6.      Authors need to read and use/cite the references in order to improve the introduction part, kinetic, isotherm, and mechanism

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I have read with interest the work of Zhang et al. This article uses various plant matter shells to evaluate the ability to adsorb pesticides after simple high-temperature carbonization to synthesize biochar. The technique in this research is not innovative. Biochar of different plant matter shells for the adsorption of pesticides can be found in many published papers. Therefore, the following points are required to address before the publication of the paper (major revision):

1. In the introduction, please provide more clear motivation for studying; the author should clarify the uniqueness and advantage of their work compared with other existing results.

2. Biochar can adsorb compounds with aromatic structures, which is an expected result. Please describe what is novel about this study.

3. There are many studies on biochar adsorption derived from waste plant matter shells, such as doi: 10.1016/j.eti.2022.102870, 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.126749, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.007, 10.3389/fceng.2021.640983, These references could be considered to be included in the Introduction.

4. The resolution of SEM analysis should be increased.

5. Why is hydrophobic interaction the primary mechanism? What are the hydrophilicity and hydrophobicity of various biochar?

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors reports on the important topic now days the use of biochar for removal of contaminants from water bodies. However, a lot of work has been done in this area in other field. but the authors suggest that the significant of the is on the fact that the studied contaminant has not been remove using the biochar material. The authors bought the material and used without modification this is of concern adsorption studied is what authors reports on, which is still a significant work.

The manuscript is littered with grammarticaly errors and typos, which make it difficult to follow the argument - I have attached the annoted document.

The paper is significant for agronomy journal may be accepted with correction of the errors.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.docx