Synthesis of Lanthanide-Functionalized Carbon Quantum Dots for Chemical Sensing and Photocatalytic Application
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The subject is interesting, however, an improvement in writing is needed.
In the abstract you write 'These results make the sensor has the potential photocatalytic activity for the degradation of water under the visible light irradiation.' I don't understand what water degradation you're talking about?
The text in the introduction is very difficult to follow and understand. Abbreviations (PET, CIE, TFA) are also used without being explained before.
For a better understanding, I think the experiential part should be shown before 'Results and Discussion'.
It also fails to talk a little more about the application targeted by the sensors. Why detect MnO4-? in what range of concentrations? selective compared to what other ions?
Part 2.2. , tell you about "As can be clearly seen that the emission spectra of... (a) shows..., it lacks the (b)? There are also missing references to argue the transitions corresponding to the peaks?
Part 2.3. you say that CQDs are highly selective towards MnO4- over the other ions (line 145-146) and then you say the opposite to line 154-155 where you talk about ‘valuable tool for the detection of CrO42-, Cr2O72- and MnO4-‘. So we don't understand anymore.
You never give the sensitivity of the sensors, what % of variation per µM of ions?
Author Response
Reviewer#1: The subject is interesting; however, an improvement in writing is needed.
Response: We are greatly appreciated to the reviewer’s comments and evaluation.
- In the abstract you write‘These results make the sensor has the potential photocatalytic activity for the degradation of water under the visible light irradiation’. I don’t understand what water degradation you are talking about？
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have revised the “Abstract” carefully and further explained the results meaning in the manuscript. (See line 22-24)
- The text in the introduction is very difficult to follow and understand Abbreviations (PET，CIE，TFA) are also used without being explained before.
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have revised the manuscript and added the full name of the abbreviation in the manuscript. (See line 13-15, line 61-62， and line 71-76)
- For a better understanding, I think the experiential part should be shown before “Results and Discussion”.
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have adjusted the order between “Results and Discussion” and “Experimental Methods”. (See line 85-128 and line 129-240)
- It also fails to talk a little more about the application targeted by the sensors. Why detect MnO4-？in what range of concentrations? Selective compared to what other ions?
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have further explained the application of the sensors and gave the range of concentration (0~50 μM). For comparison, we have selected a variety of anions including CO32-, NO3-, S2O82-, SO42-, I-, Br-, Cl-, CrO42-, Cr2O72- and MnO4- to be investigate. (See line 183-185, 209)
- Part2.2. Tell you about “As can be clearly seen that the emission spectra of … (a) shows … it lacks the (b)? There are also missing references to argue the transitions corresponding to the peaks?
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have revised the manuscript carefully in red words and supplied the corresponding references. (See line 170-178)
- Part 2.3 You say that CQDs are highly selective towards MnO4- over the other ions (line 145-146) and then you say the opposite to line 154-155 where you talk about valuable tool for the detection of CrO42-, Cr2O72- and MnO4-. So we don’t understand anymore.
Response: According to the referee’s comment, the CQDs@Tb(TFA)3 fluorescent sensor was highly selective towards MnO4- over the other anion ions. And the characteristic emission of Tb3+ is weakened in aqueous solution with CrO42-, Cr2O72- and MnO4-. Moreover, it is worth noting that MnO4- can quench the intensity remarkably. Therefore, in order to explore whether other anions would interfere with the detected CrO42-, Cr2O72- and MnO4-, we also conducted fluorescence interference experiments on the CrO42-, Cr2O72- and MnO4- anions.
- You never give the sensitivity of the sensors, what% of variation per µM of ions?
Response: To evaluate the sensitivity of the sensors toward MnO4-, we further examined the effect of anions concentration on fluorescence quenching in this paper. According to the Stern–Volmer equation: I0/I = 1+ KSV[M], we calculated that the detection limit of the sample is 0.37 μM, which shows the prepared sample CQDs@Eu(TFA)3 has an admirable sensitivity to the detection of MnO4-. (See line 223-228)
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper presents an interesting study into cqds. The synthesis and characterisation of these materials and their modification by doping or, as done in this case, lanthanide functionalisation, is of interest and value to other researchers around the world. For this reason the authors should communicate this work with an emphasis on the methods for synthesis and characterisation and the rationale for employing the parameters used here, both in fabrication and analysis of the materials.
The authors should take care in explaining their work.
In the present form, the level of English borders on incomprehensible and absolutely must be significantly improved.
Further clarifying how the results compare to related materials and how this enables the proposed catalytic applications is important.
Author Response
Reviewer#2: The paper presents an interesting study into CQDs. The synthesis and the characterization of these materials and their modification by doping or, as done in this case, lanthanide functionalisation is of interest and value to other researchers around the world. For this reason, the authors should communicate this work with an emphasis on the methods for synthesis and characterization and the rationale for employing the parameters used here, both in fabrication and analysis of the materials. The authors should take care in explaining their work. In the present form, the level of English borders on incomprehensible and absolutely must be significantly improved. Further clarifying how the results compare to related materials and how this enables the proposed catalytic applications is important.
Response: We are greatly appreciated to the reviewer’s comments and evaluation. According to the referee’s comment, we have revised the manuscript carefully in red words and further compared to the related reported material in Table. 1. In addition, in this work, we mainly developed a novel preparation method of lanthanide functional carbon quantum dots dual emission fluorescent composite CQDs@Ln(TFA)3. These results provide meaningful data for the multi-component assembly and responsive luminescent of photo functional hybrids based on modified CQDs and lanthanide, which can be expected to have potential application in photocatalytic or sensor.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Be careful that there are still a few small errors to correct. Spaces that are missing, like in:
-Line 185: But MnO4- (subscript, superscript ) with high concentration will increase the ecological risk. Can you please give references?
-Line 175: space between 'respectively' and '[47,48]'.
Author Response
we appreciated for the comments of the reviewers.
Response to revised manuscript catalysts-857073 entitled “Synthesis of Lanthanide Functionalized Carbon Quantum Dots for Chemical Sensing and Photocatalytic Application” to catalysts by Furan Zou, Sainan Wang, Fangfang Wang, Dan Liu and Ying Li*
Reviewer: Be careful that are still a few small errors to correct. Spaces that are missing, like in:
-Line 185: But MnO4-(subscript, superscript) with high concentration will increase the ecological risk. Can you please give references？
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have revised the words and cited the corresponding references [51] in the manuscript. (See line 185)
-Line 175: space between“respectively” and “[47,48].
Response: According to the referee’s comment, we have revised the manuscript and added the space between“respectively” and “[47,48]. (See line 175)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
