Development and Validation of a Method for the Simultaneous Quantification of 21 Microbial Volatile Organic Compounds in Ambient and Exhaled Air by Thermal Desorption and Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Detailed remarks:

Page 4. Line 172. Was the amber glass used here? If so, please complete it in the sentence.

Page 4. Line 177. Was the internal standard added manually? Were automatic pipettes or chromatographic syringes used for injecting? This is an important aspect in the precision of dosing, as it was a small volume of the standard.

Page 6. Line 245. How was accuracy and precision tested? Were enriched samples or certified material used? Please explain this. Referring to previous studies does not answer the question of how the accuracy and precision of the method were assessed.

Page 6. Line 250. Why was air transferred from one Tedlar bag to another? What was the purpose of this operation? Please explain this.

 

Fig. 1 and 2  Chromatograms do not show mass peaks from MS detection. These are normal GC chromatograms. Please explain the use of MS-MS detection in these studies. Was the only reason for lower limit of detection and quantification?

Table 1 shows using of the 30 m column. Please explain the use this type of column to the MS detector. Typically longer columns (60m) are used for GC / MS to separate the analytes with higher precision. By using a longer column, the peaks can be separated better. Was an MS / MS detector used or only a single MS? This is not clear in the description of the methodology.

Table 2. The linearity range, given as ng / m3, is very wide. Please provide the analytical range of the calibration curves for chromatographic analysis in concentration units. Were the high end of this range [ng / m3] obtained by sample dilution?

 

There was no testing of enrichment samples (fortified), both to assess the propriety of sampling and to evaluate the analytical method. However, I understand that the aim of the work was to develop an analytical method for mVOC determination, not to validate  of sampling.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

Review

 

Development and Validation of a Method for the Simultaneous  Quantification of  Microbial Volatile Organic Compounds in  Ambient and Exhaled Air by Thermal Desorption and Gas  Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

 

Sarah Tabbal, Badr El Aroussi, Michèle Bouchard, Geneviève Marchand  and Sami Haddad

 

Abstract: Lines 14-27

Please structure it as:

Introduction-Aims

Method

Results and interpretation

 

Introduction lines 32-139

``In today's increasingly urbanized societies, people tend to spend 80–90 % of their time indoors (e.g., home, school, office, industry, etc…) [1]`` Lines 33-34

Eliminate ``…``

Literature review should be done, updated to 2022 and internationalized.

Please analyses critically the findings of the articles and the limitations.

Please indicate also at least tree similar article to your research published recently (last 5 years).

Method

Please insert a flowchart of your research methodology steps for bettwer visibility and understanding by the journal readers as well as as large public

Fig.1  line 312 -insert in the text  the detailed  explanations link to this

Fig.2 line 318 --insert in the text  the detailed  explanations link to this

Fig 3 line 418-in the explanation please indicate which lab of which univ you mentioned?

Pathogeny upon the humans should be added to Results and Discussion chapter.

Conclusions: this subchapter should be enlarged; Underline the results of this study may suggest a potential application of bioaerosol profiling for tracing the source of atmospheric pollution, influencing factors in different environments for human community.

 

References: update the references to 2022

Please cite also:

Ilieș, D.C.; Hodor, N.; Indrie, L.; Dejeu, P.; Ilieș, A.; Albu, A.; Caciora, T.; Ilieș, M.; Barbu-Tudoran, L.; Grama, V. Investigations of the Surface of Heritage Objects and Green Bioremediation: Case Study of Artefacts from Maramureş, Romania. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 6643. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11146643

A. Oneț, D. C. Ilieș, A. Ilieș, G. V. Herman, L. Burtă, F. Marcu, R. Buhaș, T. Caciora, Ș. Baias, C. Oneț, M. Ilieș, A. Lincu, 2020, Indoor air quality assessment and its perception. Case study - historic wooden church, Romania, in  Romanian Biotechnological Letters 3:1547-1551 (https://www.e-repository.org/rbl/vol.25/iss.3/5.pdf).

 

Is it relevant and
interesting?

The paper is relevant for postpandemic period. It synthetizes the actual available literature data, focus mainly on efficiency of tests conducted in laboratory conditions. The paper is interesting for devices marketing, too, because the tests results contribute to reflect the real dimensions and conditions observed in indoor polluted environments.

How original is the topic?

Is an actual topic even it is not very original; but the subject is important  especially in the post pandemic period.

What does it add to the subject
area compared with other published material?

The paper should be better documented (cca 70 scientific published articles in references list), very few updated to 2022.

Is the paper well written?

The paper is well written. The quality of English translation is good.

Is the text clear and easy to read?

The text is well structured, clear and easy to read from the specialists in the field but as well as from the persons from public.

Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented?

The conclusions should be better represented in the paper. The authors must underline  the potential application of bioaerosol profiling for tracing the source of atmospheric pollution, influencing factors, etc effects on the  human community.

 

August  2022

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx