Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJuly 25, 2020
Decision Letter - Anwar Khitab, Editor

PONE-D-20-22508

Modern cement concrete and asphalt pavement are damaged by respiratory action and a trace quantities of organic matter (TQOM)

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. moriyoshi,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Although the study is new and important. However, as a matter of fact, the paper is unnecessarily lengthy and can be shortened by providing the names of the test methods with proper references. A list of abbreviations can also be provided for the interest of the readers. Also, eliminate the lengthy test procedures details in results and discussion part. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 04 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Anwar Khitab

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please ensure that in your methods section you have provided details of the sources of all materials, chemicals, equipment and instrumentation used in your study, including manufacturer names where relevant. This is in line with our reproducibility criterion for publishing, see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/criteria-for-publication#loc-3

3.We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

4.Thank you for stating the following in the Financial Disclosure section:

"The authors recieved no specific funding for this work."

We note that one or more of the authors are employed by a commercial company: Green Consultant Co. Ltd. and Shimadzu Corporation

a) Please provide an amended Funding Statement declaring this commercial affiliation, as well as a statement regarding the Role of Funders in your study. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. You can update author roles in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form.

Please also include the following statement within your amended Funding Statement.

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If your commercial affiliation did play a role in your study, please state and explain this role within your updated Funding Statement.

b) Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc.  

Within your Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this commercial affiliation does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests) . If this adherence statement is not accurate and  there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include both an updated Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement in your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

Additional Editor Comments:

In general, the manuscript contains significant numbers of variables: Therefore, it is advised to present a list of abbreviations for the interest of the readers.

Also, it is advised to shorten the manuscript by elaborating the name of the test method with proper references. Explaining the whole test from samples to test conditions, the brand names of the apparatus again and again has made this important study unnecessary lengthy.

Abstract:

Abstract should be concise, with brief problem statement, methodology, results and conclusion. In the current abstract, most of the part is introduction of the problem. It is suggested to exclude large introduction part and concentrate on brief methodology, results and conclusions as per standard format of an abstract.

Introduction:

Line 97: Write the complete name once for “AE”, where it appears for the first time.

In general, the introduction part lacks some important literature review related to the study.

Experiments and test methods:

Line 198: Change the word “Europa” with “Europe”. (I think so).

Line 199: Kindly write full name for “TSM”, “SPNES”, when they appear for the first time OR separately "Provide a list of abbreviations" and then do not use the whole names throughout the manuscript. At the moment, it is mix-up.

Line 218: Kindly Write fully explained term for “1H NMR”. This will be otherwise confusing for the readers. You may alternatively write “Nuclear Magnetic Resonance test”. Similar complete names can be written for 2.2.2, and 2.2.3.

Line 233: What is meant by “(Themes: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ,11) “? Kindly omit all such themes throughout the manuscript as they are not understandable at all.

As a whole, the test procedures are described in detail. In my humble view, brief description with some reference is sufficient for the interest of the readers.

Results and Discussion:

It is better to indicate the test methods with reference rather than the brand names of the instrument.

Heading 3.1: Can the observations be presented in tabular form rather than paragraphs?

Line 391: Kindly elaborate “2E1H” for the first time.

Line 395: What is meant by “This gas”?

Line 412: Change “investigate” with “investigated”.

Kindly elaborate “DD” as “Degree of Deterioration”, when it appears for the first time.

Kindly enhance font size in Table 1.

Test methods are repeatedly presented: It is suggested to present the names of the tests and their references rather than explaining the tests again and again. This has made the manuscript very lengthy.

Conclusions:

Conclusions are somewhat dry. Line 1275 to 1286 can be added to the conclusions rather than being the part of the results and discussion.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Paper is very lengthy and readers won’t be able to understand the clear theme of the paper as contents are irregularly arranged.

The authors didn’t mention any details regarding 1H NMR, GC-MS (JMS-AX-500), HPLC, High Volume Sampler, One dimensional Transient moisture permeation test and Micro focus CT scanning (CT) in the Introduction section. It’s hard for the reader to pick new terms later in the paper.

I believe that this paper would be of interest to highway engineers. Therefore, make it simple to read.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

I appreciate with many reviewers.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: PLOS ONE_Response to revierwes.pdf
Decision Letter - Anwar Khitab, Editor

PONE-D-20-22508R1

Modern cement concrete and asphalt pavement are damaged by respiratory action and trace quantities of organic matter (TQOM): Civil structures are damaged by respiratory action and trace quantities of organic matter

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. moriyoshi,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Kindly change the title. Presently, it is in sentence format. Change it to the title format. May I suggest the following title.

"Deterioration of modern concrete and asphalt pavements by respiratory action and trace quantities of organic matter". I also think there is no need for a short title, so that can be omitted.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 30 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Anwar Khitab

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Kindly change the title. Presently, it is in sentence format. Change it to the title format. May I suggest the following title.

"Deterioration of modern concrete and asphalt pavements by respiratory action and trace quantities of organic matter". I also think there is no need for a short title, so that can be omitted.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 2

I am very grateful to Dr. Preston for his encouragement and suggestions for the various new discoveries and the structure of the new treatise. We would also like to thank Dr. Khitab and Dr. Magyar for their long-standing advice, proofreading, and support for this treatise.

I think this treatise has become very long and difficult to peer review. We would like to thank all the people concerned.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: PLOS ONE_Response to reviewers_23thMarch.docx
Decision Letter - Anwar Khitab, Editor

Deterioration of modern concrete structures and asphalt pavements by respiratory action and trace quantities of organic matter

PONE-D-20-22508R2

Dear Dr. moriyoshi,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Anwar Khitab

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thanks for the understanding and patience.

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Anwar Khitab, Editor

PONE-D-20-22508R2

Deterioration of modern concrete structures and asphalt pavements by respiratory action and trace quantities of organic matter    

Dear Dr. Moriyoshi:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Anwar Khitab

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .