First Results of a Campaign of the Measurement of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Sediments of the Hooghly River, West Bengal, India
, Maria Toscanesi 2,*,†, Luciano Ferrara 2, Carlo Donadio 1,3, Priyanka Mondal 4, Jonathan Muthuswamy Ponniah 5, Gaetana Napolitano 6, Santosh Kumar Sarkar 4 and Marco Trifuoggi 2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
Please find below the recommendations to improve your manuscript:
- The abstract should give more insights and results and show how these contribute to the stated field.
- the references need to be improved - about 75% are older than 5 years, and you should consider newer references.
- This study presents measurements from 2014 to 2017 only. It is absolutely necessary to complete this data and present a statistical approach to see the trend for the future situation. If not, the paper is going to be rejected.
- Please underline the novelty of your work and the purpose and how the results contribute to the PAH toxicity assessments.
- the Conclusions section need to be a bit more elaborated.
Good luck!
Comments on the Quality of English LanguagePlease check one more time the structure of the sentence.
Author Response
- The abstract should give more insights and results and show how these contribute to the stated field.
Answer: the abstract was modified and enriched with more analytical details.
- the references need to be improved - about 75% are older than 5 years, and you should consider newer references.
Answer: Considering the limited available literature on the presence of PAHs in the Hooghly River estuary and in the Sundarban, this not-too-young literature is sometimes necessary.
- This study presents measurements from 2014 to 2017 only. It is absolutely necessary to complete this data and present a statistical approach to see the trend for the future situation. If not, the paper is going to be rejected.
Answer: The reviewer is right, we made a mistake on the date, the campaign was performed in 2018-2021. The text was accordingly modified: ‘A total 176 sediment samples were collected from November 2018 to May 2021’.
- Please underline the novelty of your work and the purpose and how the results contribute to the PAHs toxicity assessments.
Answer: As has also been requested by reviewer 2, the introduction was added of statements regarding the novelty of the manuscript. The manuscript contains a specific section, 3.2, on PAHs toxicity where it extensively discusses the contaminant richness concerning standard quality levels as well as the toxicity and mutagenicity of the compounds and the toxicity risk compared to similar investigated areas as reported by the literature.
- the Conclusions section need to be a bit more elaborated.
Answer: the conclusion section was extended as it has also been requested by reviewer 2.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. In the article, the authors presented the research results of a campaign conducted in 2014–2017 aimed at monitoring aromatic hydrocarbons in a selected river. We are currently in 2024, a lot could have changed since then. There is no explanation why so much time passed between research and publication.
2. The introduction is incomplete. We are missing an introduction to information about scurce of PAHs. Example article for use: https://doi.org/10.3390/w14193079
3. the description of the research methodology lacks limits for the determination and detection of PAHs on a given equipment, the name of the equipment is missing, there are no sample chromatographs... the description of the methodology should be expanded because it is very limited.
4. The description of the results lacks references to the literature and discussions of the results with other scientists.
5. The conclusions are very laconic and short. The “conclusions” section should be expanded.
6. Novelty / purpose of the study is not stated clearly. Please, clearly state the novelty of the presented paper at the end of the introduction part.
7. The article should be thoroughly checked for punctuation and spelling errors, and avoid unusual capitalization.
8. The formatting of the paper has more errors and needs to be carefully checked and corrected
Author Response
In the article, the authors presented the research results of a campaign conducted in 2014–2017 aimed at monitoring aromatic hydrocarbons in a selected river. We are currently in 2024, a lot could have changed since then. There is no explanation why so much time passed between research and publication.
Answer: The reviewer is right, we made a mistake on the date, the campaign was performed in 2018-2021. The text was accordingly modified: ‘A total 176 sediment samples were collected from November 2018 to May 2021’.
The introduction is incomplete. We are missing an introduction to information about scurce of PAHs. Example article for use: https://doi.org/10.3390/w14193079
Answer: The introduction already contains a detailed description of the source of PAHs: ‘PAHs can come from petrogenic, pyrogenic, and biological sources. The petrogenic route regards the extraction of petroleum and subsequent processing transformation activities in different commercial products. It also comes from accidental spills during transportation, or intentional spills, as well as from natural seepage of petroleum or coal deposits. PAHs load in crude oil varies from a few mg to ∼5 g per kg, with naphthalene as the dominating compound: mean percentual load of 60.5% and up a maximum of ∼78% relative to the total PAHs [19]. The biological source encompasses plants, fungi, and bacteria activities, with the formation of naphthalene, phenanthrene, and perylene [20]. The pyrogenic source regards essentially the production of electric power, incineration of wastes, auto vehicle emissions, residential heating, processing of coke, carbon black, coal tar, coal gasification, liquefying plants, asphalt use, and forest fires or volcanic activities [18, 21]. They also produce during the incomplete combustion of organic materials such as coal, oil, petrol, and wood. PAHs disperse in the ambient air in the gas phase and as a sorbet to aerosols and processes are usually driven by hydrophobicity [22, 23], but in the case of shallow water sediments, also storm surges and re-suspension flows [21]. Each source originates characteristic PAHs patterns useful for identification processes [18, 21]’.
the description of the research methodology lacks limits for the determination and detection of PAHs on a given equipment, the name of the equipment is missing, there are no sample chromatographs... the description of the methodology should be expanded because it is very limited.
Answer: the methodology for the PAHs analysis was added in more extended detail.
The description of the results lacks references to the literature and discussions of the results with other scientists.
The conclusions are very laconic and short. The “conclusions” section should be expanded.
Answer: the conclusion section was extended.
The novelty/purpose of the study is not stated clearly. Please, clearly state the novelty of the presented paper at the end of the introduction part.
Answer: the novelty of the paper was added at the end of the introduction.
The article should be thoroughly checked for punctuation and spelling errors, and avoid unusual capitalization.
Answer: Punctuation and spelling errors were checked and amended throughout the manuscript.
The formatting of the paper has more errors and needs to be carefully checked and corrected.
Answer: Formatting was improved.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors-
Comments on the Quality of English Language-
Author Response
Reviewer 1
- Minor editing of English language required.
Answer: Editing of English was improved by a native speaker.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. I'm surprised by such a mistake in the years... I'm glad it was corrected. From 2021 to 2024 why weren't these studies published?
2.In the introduction, I recommended the use of a given article. In my opinion, the introduction lacks data on examples of PAH toxicity, which you can find in the recommended articlehttps://doi.org/10.3390/w14193079
3. Figure 3 is illegible, nothing follows from it, please present this data differently. You should try a different type of chart.
4. the formatting of chart 4 does not meet the magazine's standards, it should be corrected.
5. I believe that there is no discussion of the results, there is no reference to other studies, other authors, it is unacceptable in this form and should be supplemented.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
- I'm surprised by such a mistake in the years. I'm glad it was corrected.From 2021 to 2024 why weren't these studies published?
Answer: This study is part of a larger assessment of the pollution degree and health status of the estuary of Hooghly River. The priority is the elaboration and publication of the data relative to the presence and distribution of other pollutants.
- In the introduction, I recommended the use of a given article.In my opinion, the introduction lacks data on examples of PAH toxicity, which you can find in the recommended article https://doi.org/10.3390/w14193079.
Answer: The article was cited in the Introduction section and a sentence on the examples reported in that article was added.
- Figure 3 is illegible, nothing follows from it, please present this data differently.You should try a different type of chart.
Answer: Figure 3 was deleted, and the relative comments in the text were modified.
- the formatting of chart 4 does not meet the magazine's standards, it should be corrected.
Answer: The format was modified.
- I believe that there is no discussion of the results, there is no reference to other studies, other authors, it is unacceptable in this form and should be supplemented.
Answer: We think the result section contains several references to the scientific literature. This is the case of the comparison of individual PAHs levels with those of other countries, such as Mediterranean coastal sediments. The ranges of sedimentary PAHs were compared with those given by literature for other rivers, coastal areas, and lagoons. In the same way, data were compared with those of the total PAHs Sundarban survey.
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAll comments have been taken into account. I recommend the article for publication.
