24小时热门版块排行榜

返回列表

lijuanmin

铜虫 (小有名气)

应助: 0 (幼儿园)
金币: 981.9
散金: 98
帖子: 214
在线: 537.2小时
虫号: 1312109
注册: 2011-06-01
性别: MM
专业: 分析仪器与试剂

[求助] 投Analytical Chemistry,一个大修，一个拒稿，编辑给拒了，还用申诉吗？已有7人参与

Dear Prof. Yu:
I am reporting on the above manuscript, which you recently submitted for consideration in Analytical Chemistry.
After a careful study of the manuscript and considering the reviewers' comments, I regret to inform you that I have decided against publication. The potential usefulness of your work is not in question. However, in light of the reviewers' evaluation and comments, I do not believe that publication is justified. I hope you will find the reviewers' specific comments helpful in planning future work. These comments are either included here or, if they were given in the form of a file, will appear at the bottom of the copy of this letter which will appear and be stored in your Author Center.
I appreciate the opportunity to have considered this contribution, and thank you for your interest in Analytical Chemistry.
Kind regards,

Reviewer: 1
Recommendation: Should not be published in Analytical Chemistry.
Comments:
The authors reported a fluorescence turn-on method for the detection of Hg2+ based on the interaction of perylene probe and Au nanoparticles. In fact, the similar sensing strategies have been reported elsewhere, the paper itself lacks novelty. Moreover, the following questions should also be addressed.
1. In the introduction, the outstanding advantages of fluorescence assays compared with the reported methods are imprecise (Page 3, line 31-34).
2. In the manuscript, the authors state that the formation of the Au/Hg amalgam resulted in release of the probes. However, the probes should be added in the system after the formation of Au/Hg amalgam according to the Experimental Section and Scheme 1.
3. Some experiments and data should be supplemented. For example, the corresponding stability of the system, the corresponding concentrations should be noted in Figures for clearness, errors bars should be added in Fig. 5, and the experimental conditions for the detection of Hg2+ in lake water samples should be described in detail.
4. As for the selectivity, the authors only selected common divalent metal ions, other valent metal ions such as Ag+, Fe3+ should be performed.
5. The limit of detection (LOD) value of 5 nM was reported. How about the maximum residue limit of Hg2+ in drinking water as prescribed in Europe or USA? In addition, the authors should describe how the LOD was calculated.
6. For the real sample analysis, the sensors should be ultrasensitive, simple, rapid, and inexpensive. The chip sensor is a good choice, so the reported method could be further developed onto a chip sensor.
Additional Questions:
Significance: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Originality: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Broad Interest: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Technical Quality: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: Yes
Are the references appropriate and correct?: In Part
Is the English adequate?: In Part
Is the quality of the figures sufficient?: In Part
Are the data statistically significant with appropriate controls included?: In Part
Reviewer: 2
Recommendation: May eventually be publishable, but requires major revisions as indicated.
Comments:
This manuscript reports a novel fluorescence turn-on strategy based on Au nanoparticles and a perylene probe for the sensing of Hg2+ ions. Although the mechanism behind the synthesis &detection are carefully studied and the results are clearly presented, this work need major revise to satisfy the requirement of publication in Anal. Chem. Please take into account the following comments:
1. The author stated that the fluorescence turn-on strategy to detect Hg2+ ions. Form the meaning of “turn-on”, we think that the fluorescence of perylene probe is first quenched by Au NPs. Then with increasing of Hg2+ ions, the fluorescence of the sensor was becoming more and more strong. But in the actual detection, the sensing of Hg2+ was performed in two separate progresses. How about the results when the experiment was performed in the continuous detection progress?
2. In the study of selectivity of the sensor, the author selected a few ions only in (Ⅱ), how about the interference when ions (Ⅰ&Ⅲ) present? Such as Ag+?
Additional Questions:
Significance: High (suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Originality: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Broad Interest: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Technical Quality: Moderate (not suitable for Analytical Chemistry)
Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: In Part
Are the references appropriate and correct?: Yes
Is the English adequate?: Yes
Is the quality of the figures sufficient?: In Part
Are the data statistically significant with appropriate controls included?: In Part

回复此楼