Microplastic Contamination in Different Marine Species of Bintaro Fish Market, Indonesia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript deals with a valuable topic. The authors investigated the microplastic contamination in three marine species from the fish markets in Indonesia. This manuscript provides useful information for understanding MPs pollution in commercial fish. However, several points should be carefully revised. The following are my specific suggestions.

 

1, Abstract: The second sentence is ambiguous. The study area is WNT, why is  "The South Sulawesi region" the subject？

2, Materials and Methods: The names of fish were not italic (type).

3, Materials and Methods: More detailed information on what was being done to the fish should be presented. Like, how did the authors get the fish fillets, what information about fish would be obtained, how many fishes were used for isolation, which part of the fish was collected (skin, muscle, or organs), and so on.

4, Results and Discussion: The name of MP shape could be annoted in title of Fig. 1.

5, The "fish fillets" or "fish tissue" was not clear. Could the authors present them more clearly, like, skin, muscle, or organs?

 

6, The whole paper should be carefully checked and revised to avoid some grammar or writing mistakes. There existed mistakes in many sentences, like in L43-45, 125-126, 207-208.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

This manuscript deals with a valuable topic. The authors investigated the microplastic contamination in three marine species from the fish markets in Indonesia. This manuscript provides useful information for understanding MPs pollution in commercial fish. However, several points should be carefully revised. The following are my specific suggestions.

 

1, Abstract: The second sentence is ambiguous. The study area is WNT, why is  "The South Sulawesi region" the subject？

Thank you for the correction. Yes, actually we were meant to say that WNT is the second highest producer of fish after South Sulawesi. We have change the sentence arrangement to avoid misunderstanding.

 

2, Materials and Methods: The names of fish were not italic (type).

Thank you for the correction. We have re-written the fish names to italic format.

 

3, Materials and Methods: More detailed information on what was being done to the fish should be presented. Like, how did the authors get the fish fillets, what information about fish would be obtained, how many fishes were used for isolation, which part of the fish was collected (skin, muscle, or organs), and so on.

Thank you for the correction. We have added further details for the fish fillet preparation. The tissue investigated in this study is the edible skin and muscle tissue of the fish.

 

4, Results and Discussion: The name of MP shape could be annoted in title of Fig. 1.

Thank you for the correction. We apologize for not putting annotations in the figure caption. We have corrected the figure caption with annotations.

 

5, The "fish fillets" or "fish tissue" was not clear. Could the authors present them more clearly, like, skin, muscle, or organs?

We have made corrections throughout the manuscript to confirm the fish part used for the study (highlighted in yellow). It was fillet so only skin and muscle edible parts of the fish.

 

6, The whole paper should be carefully checked and revised to avoid some grammar or writing mistakes. There existed mistakes in many sentences, like in L43-45, 125-126, 207-208.

Thank you very much, we have made correction through out the manuscript which is highlighted in yellow.

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper deals with an interesting topic. The paper is well written; however, I have some comments to be answered 

·       The Abstract is well-written, concise, and clear.

·       Keywords must be at least 5.

·       Line 52 what is BPA? The authors must explain that Bisphenol A (BPA) is a common chemical used in the manufacturing of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins so the reader can easily understand your statement.

·       Evaluating plastic contamination is not only for food safety but also for ensuring sustainable growth of the socio-economic sectors

·       Lines 57, you state that previous studies reported plastic pollution in Indonesia. Can you please expand this part by providing more details? What are the main results so you can show us the novelty of your study compared with other studies?

·       The authors need to add a map showing the sampling locations as well as the main activities in the surrounding area

·       Could you explain why the lower trophic species show a higher risk of MP contamination?

·       The discussion part seems more general; the authors are invited to discuss their obtained results instead given only general statements.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

 

 

The paper deals with an interesting topic. The paper is well written; however, I have some comments to be answered

• The Abstract is well-written, concise, and clear.
• Keywords must be at least 5.

Thank you for your suggestion, we have added five keywords to the abstract.

 

• Line 52 what is BPA? The authors must explain that Bisphenol A (BPA) is a common chemical used in the manufacturing of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins so the reader can easily understand your statement.

Thank you for the correction, we have added explanation on BPA in the section.

 

• Evaluating plastic contamination is not only for food safety but also for ensuring sustainable growth of the socio-economic sectors

Thank you very much for this valuable input. We have included this in our manuscript mentioning about food safety.

 

• Lines 57, you state that previous studies reported plastic pollution in Indonesia. Can you please expand this part by providing more details? What are the main results so you can show us the novelty of your study compared with other studies?

Thank you for the comment. We have added additional information in this sector Line 57. Highlighted in yellow.

 

• The authors need to add a map showing the sampling locations as well as the main activities in the surrounding area

Thank you for your suggestion, we have generated a map for our study.

 

• Could you explain why the lower trophic species show a higher risk of MP contamination?

Based on previous study, due to their feeding strategies, the lower trophic organisms tend to contain more MP contamination.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651319313971

We have included this reference in the revised document. Highlighted in yellow.

 

• The discussion part seems more general; the authors are invited to discuss their obtained results instead given only general statements.

Thank you very much for the suggestion. We will add more in the discussion. Highlighted in yellow.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper quantifies the level of microplastic contamination in fish sold at fish markets and addresses an important issue. The paper is simple and easy to read. However, there is a critical problem (i.e. no blank control information), lack of descriptive information and corrections that need to be made and these should be addressed appropriately before publication.

 

Specific comments:

Line 57：The author should state in more detail what is known and what is not known about MP pollution in Indonesia.

 

Line 69: Scientific name should be in italics.

 

Line 69: The number of individuals should be given.

 

Line 71: William T White -> White et al.?

 

Line 75: Which part of the fillet?

 

Line 80: H2O2 -> H₂O₂

 

Line 83: What is the mesh size of a filter cloth?

 

Line 102: No description of A-E.

 

Line 107: There is no information on how to check for blank. This is a very serious problem.

 

Line 111: What type of statistical tests?

 

Lines 119-123: This information should be included in the Materials and Methods section.

 

Line 125-126: Here are two identical sentences.

 

Line 142: SEM values are not readable.

 

Figure 3: The number of MPs (n=~) should be indicated.

 

Lines 189-190: Same as above mentioned.

 

Line 197-198: The type of polymer should be specified rather than the scientific name.

 

Table 2: Does the manuscript contain a reference to Table 2?

 

Results and Discussion: Mention the mechanism by which microplastics remain in the muscle.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

 

his paper quantifies the level of microplastic contamination in fish sold at fish markets and addresses an important issue. The paper is simple and easy to read. However, there is a critical problem (i.e. no blank control information), lack of descriptive information and corrections that need to be made and these should be addressed appropriately before publication.

 

 

Specific comments:

 

Line 57：The author should state in more detail what is known and what is not known about MP pollution in Indonesia.

Thank you for the comment. We have added additional information in this sector Line 57. Highlighted in yellow.

 

Line 69: Scientific name should be in italics.

Thank you very much, we have corrected the scientific names in italics.

 

Line 69: The number of individuals should be given.

Thank you very much for pointing this out. We have included this information in the materials and methods.

 

Line 71: William T White -> White et al.?

Thank you very much for the correction. We have also made similar corrections to other parts of the manuscripts.

 

 

Line 75: Which part of the fillet?

The fillet is composed on the edible skin and muscle part of the fish.

 

 

Line 80: H2O2 -> H2O2

Thank you very much we have corrected accordingly for other parts of the manuscript.

 

Line 83: What is the mesh size of a filter cloth?

Thank you for pointing this out. We have added the information in the manuscript. The filter cloth mesh size is 12.

 

Line 102: No description of A-E.

Thank you very much we have added information for figure caption.

 

Line 107: There is no information on how to check for blank. This is a very serious problem.

Thank you very much for pointing this out. We have prepared a blank sample for each species. We will include this information in the manuscript.

 

Line 111: What type of statistical tests?

Thank you very much, we have included the detailed information of the statistical test (highlighted in yellow).

 

 

Lines 119-123: This information should be included in the Materials and Methods section.

Thank you for the suggestion, we have moved this information to the materials and methods section.

 

Line 125-126: Here are two identical sentences.

Thank you. We have excluded on of the sentences.

 

Line 142: SEM values are not readable.

Thank you. We have corrected the figure so the SEM values are readable.  

 

Figure 3: The number of MPs (n=~) should be indicated.

Thank you. We have made corrections accordingly.

 

Lines 189-190: Same as above mentioned.

Thank you. We have made corrections accordingly.

 

Line 197-198: The type of polymer should be specified rather than the scientific name.

The FTIR spectra indicated the microplastic particles from each fish species. According to the spectra vibrations in possibly represents polyamide and polyester polymers. This is why in the caption we described as per fish species.

 

Table 2: Does the manuscript contain a reference to Table 2?

Thank you very much, we have added the references to table 2.

 

Results and Discussion: Mention the mechanism by which microplastics remain in the muscle.

Thank you very much for the suggestion. However, we are currently uncertain on the mechanism of microplastic in the muscle tissues.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0025326X21009498?via%3Dihub

We will include this in the discussion.

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

It should be clearly indicated in the manuscript what is the main goal of the work and what are the specific goals of the work.
Is fish caught in Indonesia exported to the European market or other markets? This information should be included in the manuscript.
Do the authors have any knowledge on how to buy Bintaro fish from fish market traders from other regions of the world?
  Are preventive measures taken to reduce the contamination of Indonesian water bodies with microplastics?

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 4 Comments

 

It should be clearly indicated in the manuscript what is the main goal of the work and what are the specific goals of the work.

Thank you very much for the suggestion. We will include more information in the manuscript.

 

Is fish caught in Indonesia exported to the European market or other markets? This information should be included in the manuscript.

Thank you very much for the suggestion. Currently the Bintaro market only operates in regions of Indonesia. Where some of the fish sold in the market are from other regions of Indonesia, such as East Nusa Tenggara (ENT) and Sulawesi. In addition, some buyers also come from other regions including Java and Bali.

 

Do the authors have any knowledge on how to buy Bintaro fish from fish market traders from other regions of the world?

Currently non to our knowledge. However, the most concern is that Bintaro is located in Lombok island which is a tourism destination. In addition, most hotels and restaurants rely on this market to distribute fresh marine fish.

 

Are preventive measures taken to reduce the contamination of Indonesian water bodies with microplastics?

For future sustainable toursim development an action is needed to be taken indeed. However, currently now in Indonesia the actions are based on regions. In Bali they are currently doing a great job by excluding plastics from shopping stores. However, in more rural regions such as WNT, there has not been any solid action up to now.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I would like to invite the authors to verify the paper's English and edit/improve the Introduction and conclusion parts. 

Author Response

I would like to invite the authors to verify the paper's English and edit/improve the Introduction and conclusion parts. 

Thank you for the suggestion,

We have made extensive correction in English language throughout the manuscript.

All corrections are highlighted in yellow.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The description overlapped (Lines 238-239 and Lines 248-249).

 

Table 2: The number of individuals should be shown.

 

Line 287: Please lowercase 2.

 

Line 292：Please indicate a unit of 12.

 

Line 292: Please indicate what material the Filter cloth was made of.

 

Lines 325-326: What do three replicates mean?

 

Figure 1: SEM values are still not readable.

 

Figure 2: Please show the number of MPs.

 

Line 105: in in vitro

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

Thank you for your suggestions and corrections.

Detailed replies can be found in the document attached.

 

Regards

Author Response File: Author Response.docx