A Novel ppb-Level Sensitive and Highly Selective Europium-Based Diketone Luminescent Sensor for the Quantitative Detection of Aluminum Ions in Water Samples

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please find my review in the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.   

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript describes the synthesis and characterization of a novel Eu-complex, a luminescent-based optical sensor, and its use in the quantitative detection of aluminum ions in water. X-ray diffraction, proton NMR and Raman spectroscopies were used to characterize the complexes.

This work seems to have been carefully done, the results are interesting, but the manuscript writing needs improvement concerning the English language, and more attention should be provided to the manuscript presentation. Several words are often repeated and there are also some typos. In my opinion, this manuscript can be accepted for publication in Analytica after major revisions.

Specific comments:

 - Page 1, Introduction: it should be “Al³⁺”; also, on pages 2 and 3.

- Introduction: “metal ions” repeated several times.

- Page 3: it should be “5 mL, 2 mL and 2 mL of”.

- Page 3: it should be “Characterization of the complex was done by…”

- Page 3: the word “then” repeated several times.

- Page 3, line before ICP-OES study: unclear sentence ”aluminum ion was added first…”

- Page 3, line before Quantitative detection: it should be “complex 1”

- Page 4: it should be “¹H NMR”

- SI, Figure S2: it should be “sensor”

- Page 5: “sensor” repeated several times.

- Page 6, unclear sentence: “The binding constant properties of the sensor…”

- Page 7, it should be: Zn²⁺, Cu²⁺, Co²⁺, Cd²⁺, etc.

- Page 10, Table 1: it is confused; re-write it in a clear way.

- Carefully see the references.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English Language needs improvement.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please find my review in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is correct.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

- Page 5 (before page 3): it should be "complex 1", now it is written "complex 1 B".

- Check carefully: there are still some "Al⁺³" instead of the correct "Al³⁺".

- Page 9 (before page 7): it should be Zn²⁺, Cu²⁺, etc., it was not corrected.

- "Carefully see the references" means to check carefully their spelling and follow the same format/style for all of them, what was not the case in the present manuscript.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf