Microplastic Pollution in Sea Turtle Nests on the Beaches of Nautla and Vega de Alatorre, Veracruz

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Microplastic pollution in sea turtle nests on the beaches of Nautla and Vega de Alatorre, Veracruz

The topic of the manuscript “Microplastic pollution in sea turtle nests on the beaches of Nautla and Vega de Alatorre, Veracruz” is interesting and thoroughly investigated by the author. However, require certain clarifications/revision for improving the basics of the manuscript.       

1.        The types of microplastic samples from different regions was not mentioned in this study. It is advised that the raman spectra analysis be supplemented to account for the types of microplastic samples. The analysis of raman spectra results has been recently reported in the literature for reference (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.7b00369).

2.        The characteristics of microplastic samples from different regions was not mentioned in this study. It is advised that the SEM and TEM analysis be supplemented to account for the size and shape of microplastic samples. The analysis of SEM and TEM results has been recently reported in the literature for reference (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134589;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.129940).

3.        Figure 3:Please adjust the layout of the three small pictures of fig.3a, fig.3b and fig.3c in Figure 3 to align as much as possible.

4.        Added a Section 3.4 about Implications of this work.

5.        Line 51-54: please add more relevant reference. E,g, doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.09.176; doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126065;

 

6.         The description of the conclusion section is too long and it is recommended to refine the conclusions of this study.

Author Response

1. Thank you very much for your recommendation, it was not possible to perform the Raman spectroscopy analyzes in this study because the necessary equipment was not available.
2. I appreciate your contribution, it will be taken into account for future research, at this time it is not possible to carry out such analyzes.
3. Fitted all 3 images into one
4. Added section 3.4 job implications
5. Added one more reference to the text.

6. The shortening of the conclusions was made

Reviewer 2 Report

Please, see the attachment.

1.     The main question addressed by the research regards the topic of a particular kind of marine pollution by microplastics affecting the environmental conditions of some nesting areas used by the sea turtle Chelonia mydas.

 

2.     The purpose of the study, aimed to determine the level of exposure of nests to microplastic pollution, is very interesting and represents a good baseline for further studies on field.

 

3.     The paper adds new insights in the research area analyzing the impacts of microplastic pollution on turtle’s nesting sites.

 

4.     The methodology is well explained and detailed also in its statistical analysis.

 

5.     The conclusions are consistent with the evidences presented in manuscript, but it could be advisable to extend the topic also in other coastal regions in Ocean seas and in Mediterranean basin.

 

6.     The references are appropriated for a scientific article.

 

7.     Table and figures are correct and well suited to the resulting data.   

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

1. Thank you very much for your recommendation.

Reviewer 3 Report

This study reported the mircoplastics pollution in sea turtle nests on the beaches of Nautla and Vega de Alatorre, Veracruz. The information on the number concentration, mass concentration, form, color of the plastics were presented. The results of the present study provided baseline data of microplatics pollution in the study beach. This is a conventional study on the microplastics pollution in sea beachs but the data is still valuable. Therefore, I recommend accepting of this paper after a major revison.

1) The most of text in conclusion section should be combined in the texts of results or discussion sections. Only the main finding and the research prospect were provided in the conclusion section.

2) What want to be expressed in the all the Figures  is  ambiguous and vague. The unit of y-axis in Figure 2 should be provided. The same problem was also found in Figure 3. The legends in all the figures were indiscernibility. There are 4 size ranges in Figure 3a, however, 6 size ranges was showed in the stack in the Figure 3a.

3) Do you have any information on the chemical compostions of microplastics founded in the study area?

4) What's are the potential causes which affect the different microplactic pollution among different sites?  

Author Response

1) Thank you for your contribution, it will be taken into account.2) The y-axis units are pieces of microplastics will be included in the graphs. The size interval is from 1 to 5mm which is divided into ranges of 1-2, 2.1-3, 3.1-4 and 4.1-5mm,3) It was not possible to perform spectroscopic analysis to determine its chemical composition due to the lack of necessary equipment.4) The possible causes of contamination by microplastics in the area will be included in the discussion of the article.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I have no more comments on the revised manuscript.