Peer Review History

Original SubmissionFebruary 2, 2021
Decision Letter - Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Editor

PONE-D-21-03199

Removal of organic contaminants from wastewater with GO/MOFs composites

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Wei,

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 CAREFULLY addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 16 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. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Ph. D.

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. 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:

2a) 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.

2b) 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.

3. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 3 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

[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

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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

Reviewer #2: 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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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: In this manuscript, synthesis, characterization and organic contaminants removal performance of GO/MOFs composite is described. The methodology and applications presented in the manuscript are interesting and will appeal to a broader readership of Plos One. The manuscript is recommended for publication subjected to addressing following comments:

1. GO/MOFs first explained then abbreviation should be used.

2. The introduction section needs to be modified as the discussion appears to be more scattered in nature.

3. To gain the porous parameters (e. g. the specific surface area, total pore volume, the surface area and pore volume of the microspores), N2 adsorption-desorption experiments for GO/MOFs are suggested to supply.

4. Proper characterization of GO like XRD, SEM and Raman should be included.

5. The dye absorption behavior, suggesting authors use commercial activated carbon as the benchmark; and evaluate the absorption efficiency of these GO/MOFs composite.

6. The cycle performance of the adsorbent is suggested to be checked.

7. The English should be carefully polished. Also, many format problems should be addressed.

8. The quality of ALL OF FIGURES should be further decorated. The following literature should be consulted and employed: Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2020, 27, 32874–32887; ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 2019, 11, 18165-18177; ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 2019, 11, 43949-43963.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript entitiled “Removal of organic contaminantsfrom wastewater with GO/MOFscomposites” submitted by Fuhua Wei et al is an nice submission regarding Environmental sciences. The idea , concept and the methodology of the manuscript is novel as well as well defined however the manuscript needs to be corrected before acceptance. The comments are :

1. Please use full form of abbreviation when using first time in the manuscript. What is MOF means here?

2. Line 35-39, meaning is unclear with grammatical mistakes. Rephrase it.

3. Author has mentioned many times about the toxicity of the previous materials in introduction. They need to be clear with statement about the biological toxicity with proper citations. In general, toxicity applied to the biological toxicity of materials, metals or dyes to the living cells present in environmental sources. Author should focus also in this issue in the introduction. Some suggested citations are mentioned in the last comment.

4. Introduction should also mention, what is the need of the new material and what is the hypothesis of synthesis of this new material.

5. Why Zr and Fe? Any specific properties which led to better environmental application? Mention in introduction.

6. It will be better if, author can present the mechanism mentioned in the result and discussion section through a schematic diagram.

7. Lastly authors are suggested to cite some recent articles about the metal toxicity in environment. Some of the suggested one are: DOI: 10.1039/C7RA05943D, https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfx204, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.07.037,https://doi.org/10.1080/21691401.2018.1503598 , DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2021.111888 , DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2020.104535 , DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2020-0138, DOI: 10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100299; DOI: 10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100345; https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.7b01522, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2018.07.020 , DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115482

**********

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

Reviewer #2: 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

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Removal of organic contaminants from wastewater with GO/MOFs composites”. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have studied comments carefully and tried our best to revise the manuscript. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The point to point responds to the reviewer’s comments are listed as following:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer#1

Comments to the Author

In this manuscript, synthesis, characterization and organic contaminants removal performance of GO/MOFs composite is described. The methodology and applications presented in the manuscript are interesting and will appeal to a broader readership of Plos One. The manuscript is recommended for publication subjected to addressing following comments:

Comment 1: GO/MOFs first explained then abbreviation should be used.

Response to Comment 1: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript.According to your comment, we have added the interpretation of GO/MOFs in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. (Page 1,lines 10)

Comment 2: The introduction section needs to be modified as the discussion appears to be more scattered in nature.

Response to Comment 2: Thank you for your valuable advice. According to your comment, the introduction section have modified in the revised paper. (Page 2-3)

Comment 3: To gain the porous parameters (e. g. the specific surface area, total pore volume, the surface area and pore volume of the microspores), N2 adsorption-desorption experiments for GO/MOFs are suggested to supply.

Response to Comment 3: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. According to your comment, We have added the Figure 4 , the surface area and pore volume of the microspores in the revised paper. (Page 7,lines145-148;Page 8,Fig.4)

Comment 4: Proper characterization of GO like XRD, SEM and Raman should be included.

Response to Comment 4:Thank you for your valuable suggestion. According to your comment, We have added the characterization of GO in the revised paper. (Page 6,Fig.2;page 7,Fig.3(b))

Comment 5: The dye absorption behavior, suggesting authors use commercial activated carbon as the benchmark; and evaluate the absorption efficiency of these GO/MOFs composite.

Response to Comment 5: Thank you for your valuable advice. We have purchased the activated carbon, but the manufacturer has not delivered the product for a long time. We are very sorry about it.The data will be added to future research.

Comment 6. The cycle performance of the adsorbent is suggested to be checked.

Response to Comment 6: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. We are sorry about the mistakes. According to your comment, The cycle performance of the adsorbent have corrected in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper.(Page 9,lines 172-173)

Comment 7. The English should be carefully polished. Also, many format problems should be addressed.

Response to Comment 7: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. We are sorry about the mistakes. According to your comment, the revised paper have checked by a native English speaker because there are some grammatical and spelling errors that have to be corrected. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper.

Comment 8. The quality of ALL OF FIGURES should be further decorated. The following literature should be consulted and employed: Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2020, 27, 32874–32887; ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 2019, 11, 18165-18177; ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 2019, 11, 43949-43963.

Response to Comment 8: Thank you for your valuable advice. According to your comment, we have added the reference [7]、[2]、[12]in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper.

Reviewer#2:

The manuscript entitiled “Removal of organic contaminantsfrom wastewater with GO/MOFscomposites” submitted by Fuhua Wei et al is an nice submission regarding Environmental sciences. The idea , concept and the methodology of the manuscript is novel as well as well defined however the manuscript needs to be corrected before acceptance. The comments are :

Comment 1: Please use full form of abbreviation when using first time in the manuscript. What is MOF means here?

Response to Comment 1: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript .We are sorry about the mistakes. According to your comment, we have added the interpretation of GO/MOFs in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. (Page 1,lines 10)

Comment 2: Line 35-39, meaning is unclear with grammatical mistakes. Rephrase it.

Response to Comment 2: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. We are sorry about the mistakes. According to your comment, the revised paper have checked by a native English speaker because there are some grammatical and spelling errors that have to be corrected. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. (Page 2,lines 35-38)

Comment 3: Author has mentioned many times about the toxicity of the previous materials in introduction. They need to be clear with statement about the biological toxicity with proper citations. In general, toxicity applied to the biological toxicity of materials, metals or dyes to the living cells present in environmental sources. Author should focus also in this issue in the introduction. Some suggested citations are mentioned in the last comment.

Response to Comment 3: Thank you for your valuable advice. According to your comment, we have added the reference [3]、[5]、[6]、[21]、[22]、[23]、[24]in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper.

Comment 4: Introduction should also mention, what is the need of the new material and what is the hypothesis of synthesis of this new material.

Response to Comment 4: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. According to your comment, we have added the content in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. (Page 3,lines 76-81)

Comment 5: Why Zr and Fe? Any specific properties which led to better environmental application? Mention in introduction.

Response to Comment 5: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. According to your comment, we have added the content in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. (Page 3,lines 82-85)

Comment 6. It will be better if, author can present the mechanism mentioned in the result and discussion section through a schematic diagram.

Response to Comment 6: Thank you for your careful reading of our manuscript. According to your comment, Due to time problems, the schematic diagram could not be provided in time. We are sorry about it. The schematic diagram will be added to future research.

Comment 7. Lastly authors are suggested to cite some recent articles about the metal toxicity in environment. Some of the suggested one are: DOI: 10.1039/C7RA05943D, https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfx204, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2018.07.037,https://doi.org/10.1080/21691401.2018.1503598 , DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2021.111888 , DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2020.104535 , DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2020-0138, DOI: 10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100299; DOI: 10.1016/j.mtchem.2020.100345; https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.7b01522, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2018.07.020 , DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115482

Response to Comment 7: Thank you for your valuable advice. According to your comment, we have added the reference [3]、[5]、[6]、[21]、[22]、[23]、[24]in the revised paper. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper.

Decision Letter - Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Editor

Removal of organic contaminants from wastewater with GO/MOFs composites

PONE-D-21-03199R1

Dear Dr. Wei,

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,

Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Ph. D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. 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

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. 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

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. 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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. 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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: the authors have addressed all the comments and made the revision properly.The manuscript can be recommended for acceptance.

**********

7. 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

Reviewer #2: No

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Editor

PONE-D-21-03199R1

Removal of organic contaminants from wastewater with GO/MOFs composites

Dear Dr. Wei:

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

Professor Yogendra Kumar Mishra

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 .