Nutritive and Chemical Composition and In Vitro Digestibility of Cladodes of the Opuntia Species

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic of the manuscript is interesting and relevant, especially due to the increasing number of drought periods around the world.

The structure of the manuscript is maintained, the problem is described, the obtained results are widely discussed, the methods are described quite clearly, although some information is missing.

How many cladodes were harvested form one cactus or for one sample?

The results are described extensively along with the discussion, in some places it is a bit difficult to understand whether they are talking about the results obtained in this experiment or other scientists. There is a little lack of clarity and concreteness in highlighting the most important and relevant results.

Lots of layout errors, font mismatches.

A review of recent literature sources is missing. Most of the references are older than 10 years, the latest is 2019.

Author Response

plaese see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Nutritive, chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of 2 cladode of opuntia species

 

The authors did extensive work and the results are well supported statistically. The job can be accepted.

I only have a couple of observations:

1. It would be convenient for the authors to add some images of some of the species in the Introduction or Methodology Section.

2. In Table 2 and 3. Please use the letter “a” to designate the highest average in all columns.

3. Authors must adhere to the guidelines for authors, especially in citations, references and headings.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Keywords: the words "Chemical composition"; "Digestibility", already in the title of the manuscript. Thus, to expand the search for your study I suggest that you replace them;

On line 31 check the writing of the name "Opuntia Species";

In the collection of the species there is no information of the possible researcher responsible for identifying the samples, and it is not possible to verify whether the species were recorded in herbaria.

All equipment used in the experiment should mention the manufacturer's model and country (line 93)

Linha 143-144 The chemical components of plants have a wide variation, both in composition and in content and vary between species and within species.  What would these variations be? It was not clear in the text.

Na linha 156 – 157: The DM content of the determined cultivars was ranged from 86.40-91.88% (Table 2). This indicates that there was a high DM content in the tested cultivars.  What factor do you consider relevant to this statement?

N line 180: This indicated that the spineless are in better position in nutritional content.  What index did you base on to affirm this result?

Check that some scientific names of the species are not in italics. I suggest you do a thorough review.

Why do authors use outdated references?

The precise completion improved demonstrating the impact and relevance of the search.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

- The authors discuss the employment of various cladode of opuntia species for Nutritive, chemical composition and in vitro digestibility. Even though there are some innovative approaches in the manuscript, there are some vital points needed to be taken into account before moving forward:

- The English of the manuscript is needed to be evaluated by a native speaker or by a professional editing service.

- The abbreviations should be given as full in the first instance. Part as Abbreviations (Of course, according to the structure of the journal), the guide section of the authors should be checked.

- For better analysis of the results, it is suggested to use analysis  Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS); from Essential oil or Aqueous extract.

- Insufficient written discussion; Please refer to the latest research of other researchers and rewrite it according to the purpose of the research.

 - It is suggested; To increase the quality of work, survival tests (The cellular viability), like MTT should be used.

 

- The overall conceptualizing, evaluation and discussion of the data should be reconsidered.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript was improved

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Author

Revision accepted by my opinion.