The Migration of Cd in Granitic Residual Soil and Marine Clay: Batch and Column Studies
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors, although the article title is intriguing in general, it still need significant improvement before it can be published.
My key points are listed here.
1. The author focuses on Cd Migration in Granitic Residual Soil and Marine Clay, but fails to present regional significance in the discussion section. The authors presented their study, however they did not support or justify their findings with public domain data. One thing to note is that there has been a lot of study done on the same issue in the past from various geographic locations.
2. In the final paragraph of the Introduction section, authors should independently identify the most significant objective of their study.
3. The references should follow the journal format. For example, References 1, 2, and 3 should be combined. (However, the permeability values reported by [33] in Sungai Besar Selangor varied between 1.18 - 1.49 X10-9 m/s.) Reference 33 needs to be revised as per the format. Before the reference number, provide the name. 42nd Reference (According to [42]).
4. All figures should accord to the journal's format requirements. Also, the figure resolution is low and could be enhanced.
Figure 1 needs to be improved. Figure 3 (SEM Images) should be correctly arranged so that all of the information presented in the SEM images is readable.
Figure 4a is not cited in the text.
7. Figure 5 should be carefully arranged to prevent taking up excess space.
8. Finally, the authors discuss the effect of CD but do not discuss its commercial/economic/hazard relevance. The authors should explain why they undertook this research.
Author Response
Thank you for your review, opinion and recommendation on my paper. I really appreciate the comments and here is the revision that I made. Hopefully, you will be satisfied with my revision of my paper. Thank you
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors, after reviewing your paper, my opinion is that the topic the paper dealt with is very interesting and you succeeded gathering numerous interesting results. However, after the deep reading of article, I have noticed that there are somethings to be corrected before the acceptance for the article publication. Please, read my comments in the document below.
Comments for author File: Comments.docx
Author Response
Thank you for your review, opinion and recommendation on my paper. I really appreciate the comments and here is the revision that I made. Hopefully, you will be satisfied with my revision of my paper. Thank you
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All the comments have been addressed by the authors. But still they haven't modified the figures as per the comments provided during the R1 phase.
Figures 1, 2, and 3 are of very poor quality. Figure 2 seems to be a copy and paste. Figure 1 should be provided with a scale or a coin as a symbol for a scale. Figure 2 should be re-drawn and Figure 3 should be improved with the resolution and its content so all the information can be read easily.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for reviewing and commenting my paper. Please see my attachments to view my response to your comments.
Thank you
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
