“…Since CaCl 2 (20)@MIL-101/cotton showed very noticeable performances in PM removal, the competitiveness of this filter was compared with reported filters containing MOFs, as shown in Table . In Table , the quantity of loaded porous materials, PD, QF (for PM2.5), and face velocity are shown to compare the performance of CaCl 2 (20)@MIL-101/cotton with the early results. ,,,,,, So far, there are several results on PM removal with MOF-modified filters; however, many of the old reports could not be included in Table since the QFs were not provided or the experimental conditions were very different from those of this work. ,,− For example, FVs were quite different (usually 5.3 cm·s –1 or 5 m·s –1 ) ,,,,,− from that in this work (20 cm·s –1 ). The QF values, if obtained under different FVs, cannot be compared adequately because QF values rely on the FV.…”