Next Article in Journal
The Sandwich-Structured PVA/PA/PVA Tri-Layer Nanofiltration Membrane with High Performance for Desalination and Pollutant Removal
Previous Article in Journal
The Diatom Genus Navicula in Spring Ecosystems with the Description of Navicula aquaesuavis sp. nov.
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Sonoplasma Frequency Tuning of Electric Pulses to Modulate and Maximise Reactive Oxygen Species Generation

Water 2024, 16(19), 2753; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16192753 (registering DOI)
by Egor Mikhalev 1,*, Anna Kamler 1, Vadim Bayazitov 1, Madina Sozarukova 1, Roman Nikonov 1, Igor Fedulov 1, Elena Mel’nik 1, Alexander Ildyakov 2, Demid Smirnov 1, Mikhail Volkov 3, Dmitry Varvashenko 3 and Giancarlo Cravotto 4
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Water 2024, 16(19), 2753; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16192753 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 28 August 2024 / Revised: 24 September 2024 / Accepted: 25 September 2024 / Published: 27 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Wastewater Treatment and Reuse)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

 

The aim of this work is to investigate the possibility of regulating the ROS content in water by altering the characteristics of the plasma discharge that occurs under hydrodynamic cavitation in the water flow. The manuscript is well written but needs reorganization according to comment 4. In addition, the findings are substantial especially the reduction of the process time and the low energy consumption. However, some comments need to be considered before any further recommendations:

 

1-     The conclusion section is missed. It should be added.

2-     A suitable graphical abstract in missed. It is advisable to add a graphical abstract that reflects the methodology, analysis and results.

3-     Some keywords such as green process has nothing to do with this process. Since there is an oxidation of the pollutants and elimination of CO2, this process is not green. In addition, all keywords should be linked by some words with the subject of the manuscript.

4-     The organization of the manuscript should be revised. The discussion of any figure or table must be after the figure or the table. Their discussion should be after them.

5-     Some recommendations for future work can be added after the conclusions.

6-      After adding the conclusions, it is not necessary to repeat the results in both the conclusion and the abstract.

7-     The literature list should be updated by recent researches and reviews concerning combined treatment processes such as electrocoagulation and other low cost processes such as:

 TM Al-Zghoul, Z Al-Qodah, A Al-Jamrah, Performance, modeling, and cost analysis of chemical coagulation-assisted solar powered electrocoagulation treatment system for pharmaceutical wastewater, Water 15 (5), 980, 2023.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We are grateful for your attention to our article. We have carefully read your remarks to the article. All edits were marked inside manuscript file for convenience. The following changes have been made to the article (the numbering matches the numbering of your comments): 

  1.  The conclusion section is missed. It should be added
    Thank you for pointing this out. The conclusion section has been added. 
  2. A suitable graphical abstract in missed. It is advisable to add a graphical abstract that reflects the methodology, analysis and results.
    We agree with this comment. Therefore, a more suitable graphical abstract was added. 
  3. Some keywords such as green process has nothing to do with this process. Since there is an oxidation of the pollutants and elimination of CO2, this process is not green. In addition, all keywords should be linked by some words with the subject of the manuscript.
    Thank you very much for your comment. The "green process" keyword has been replaced with "reagent-free" keyword. 
  4. The organization of the manuscript should be revised. The discussion of any figure or table must be after the figure or the table. Their discussion should be after them.
    Agree. We have carefully revised the organization of the manuscript and added the discussion of figures and tables after the figure or the table (fig. 1, fig. 5, fig. 7, fig. 8)
  5. Some recommendations for future work can be added after the conclusions.
    Thank you very much for your remark. Recommendations for future work have been added (lines 366-369).
  6. After adding the conclusions, it is not necessary to repeat the results in both the conclusion and the abstract.
    Thank you for your comment. The conclusions section provides more detailed analysis of the results.
  7. The literature list should be updated by recent researches and reviews concerning combined treatment processes such as electrocoagulation and other low cost processes such as:

     TM Al-Zghoul, Z Al-Qodah, A Al-Jamrah, Performance, modeling, and cost analysis of chemical coagulation-assisted solar powered electrocoagulation treatment system for pharmaceutical wastewater, Water 15 (5), 980, 2023.

    Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have updated the literature list by some recent researches (Ref. 9, 10, 11, 12).

With best regards,

Article Authors 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Mikhalev et al. have presented a research article entitled Sonoplasma frequency tuning of electric pulses to modulate and maximise reactive oxygen species generation. The research article may be of broad interest to the scientific community. Therefore, I recommend publishing it in Water after minor revision.

Several issues should be addressed as follows:

1. Authors should increase the resolution of figures in the manuscript.

2. The following work should be considered and cited to give a more general view to the possible readers. Page 1, Line 42: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28217326.

3. The results obtained should be compared with those from the literature.

4. Conclusion section should be added.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We are grateful for your attention to our article. We have carefully read your remarks to the article. All edits were marked inside manuscript file for convenience. The following changes have been made to the article (the numbering matches the numbering of your comments): 

  1. Authors should increase the resolution of figures in the manuscript.
    Thank you very much for pointing this out. We have carefully revised the manuscript and increased the resolution of figures where possible (fig. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).
  2. The following work should be considered and cited to give a more general view to the possible readers. Page 1, Line 42: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28217326.
    Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have considered and cited this work in the article (line 45). 
  3. The results obtained should be compared with those from the literature.
    Thank you for your comment. The obtained results have been compared with those from the literature for chemiluminescence curves (line 226, Ref. 39) and hydrogen peroxide decomposition (line 274, Ref. 47).
  4. Conclusion section should be added.
    Thank you for your recommendation. Conclusion section have been added to the manuscript. 

With best regards,

Article Authors 

Back to TopTop