Next Article in Journal
Research on a Multi-Species Combined Habitat Suitability Assessment Method for Various Fish Species
Previous Article in Journal
Does the Collaboration of Digitalization Foster Regional Green Development?
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Sensory Profile of Semi-Hard Goat Cheese Preserved in Oil for Different Lengths of Time

Sustainability 2023, 15(20), 14797; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014797
by Stefani Levak 1, Ivica Kos 2, Samir Kalit 1,*, Iva Dolenčić Špehar 1,*, Darija Bendelja Ljoljić 1, Ante Rako 3 and Milna Tudor Kalit 1
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sustainability 2023, 15(20), 14797; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014797
Submission received: 15 September 2023 / Revised: 7 October 2023 / Accepted: 10 October 2023 / Published: 12 October 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article describes traditional goat cheese ripening methods. I think it's a great idea to describe the science behind these methods used in the past. In the Introduction section, it was stated that these methods are not standardized. I think it would be quite difficult to standardize such a method since it has many regional influences and depends a lot on consumer tastes. It would have been much more interesting if the cheese specialities had also been produced according to traditional methods, I think the results would have been much more suggestive.

From a scientific point of view, it would have been interesting if other laboratory determinations were made, such as, for example, microbiological ones.

Do you think that they (microorganisms present) have nothing to do with the properties of the finished product? How does the ripening method influence the populations of microorganisms present in the product?

 

I have not detected any English wording or editing problems. I believe that after proof editing, the article can be published (from the point of view of the English language).

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Please see the attachment.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

     

Reviewer Comment

The research had a good template both in terms of subject and writing language. The methodology had an evidence-based template. However, there were also areas that needed to be corrected and explained in more detail. The rationale for the research, why it was conducted, and what kind of gap in the literature was planned was not explained. At the end of the introduction section, the study should be explained with better justification. In some places, information about the literature is given without citing the source. Sources must be cited in these places. Some places are not discussed in the discussion section. All results should be discussed with the literature and inferences should be made with as much reference as possible. Additionally, sources should be organized and, if possible, revised with yearly current ones. Please make your arrangements completely and carefully..

1.      Page 2, line 74-76; “The result is that the cheese is almost inedible due to its pronounced dryness, which unfortunately can only contribute to an increase in food waste.” You must make reference to the literature information you provided in the introduction section. Add the required source.

2.      Page 2, line 77-94; The reason for conducting the study should be justified in the last 2 paragraphs of the introduction section. Sources in the literature are given, but it is not clear why you planned this study and what your study contributes to the literature. After presenting the literature studies, you end the introduction section by giving information about the rationale of the study and what it contributes, and then explaining the purpose. Make the necessary arrangements with this flow.

3.      Page 3, line 96-124; “2.1 Semi-hard goat cheese production” A reference to the mulkaka procedure should be added at the end of the explanation on how semi-hard goat cheese is produced.

4.      Page 4, line 128-134; “2.2 Cheese sampling” Add the source reference at the end of this titled description.

5.      Page 4, line 204; In the data analysis section, an explanation should be added about whether the normality of the data was checked and whether the data was distributed normally.

6.      Page 6, line 48-51; “Group 1 (control group) = cheese ripening in air (60 days); Group 2 = cheese ripening in oil for 50 days after 10 days of ripening in air; Group 3 = cheese ripening in oil for 40 days after 20 days of ripening in air. Different letters referring to the same attribute imply significant difference (P < 0.05) between ripening treatments.” It should be discussed in this section.

7.      Page 9, line 266; “This can be explained by the longer ripening in oil, which resulted in the most pronounced sour odor” Your comments should not contain personal opinions. If you are writing such a precise and clear explanation, you should also cite the source.

8.      There were deficiencies in some of the references and these should be edited.

English is generally understood. However, there are some areas that need to be corrected, albeit slightly. Editing will create a more fluent writing.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Please see the attachment.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors The work sent to me for review is very valuable, but I recommend making some corrections. I marked two detailed comments on your couple's manuscript, adding it as an attachment. I also recommend that you discuss your research results more thoroughly with those of other authors. The conclusions are also too laconic and do not refer to customs duty. The conclusions mention that preservation through oil prevents food waste, but this needs to be more detailed. Similarly, it is stated without detail that preservation with oil improves the shelf life of cheeses under certain ripening conditions, but it is not clearly specified under what conditions or references to them.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Please see the attachment.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop