Applications and Uses of Moringa Oleifera Seeds for Water Treatment, Agricultural Fertilization, and Nutraceuticals

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Applications and Uses of Moringa oleifera Seeds for Water Treatment, Agricultural Fertilization, and Nutraceuticals

 

Overall Formatting:

• Please ensure that scientific names and formulas are appropriately written and formatted.

Title:

• Informative and specific.

Authors and affiliations:

• No issues found

Abstract:

• The abstract’s background and aims are transparent and were written excellently.
• The methodology section can be improved by highlighting the major databases used.
• Results section should highlight the breakthroughs observed or discovered during the review process.
• Conclusion should be brief and should highlight why this paper is essential.

Keywords:

• Most keywords are inclusive and were also repeated from the title. Please consider adding more keywords to improve the paper's visibility and searchability. Consider adding SALSA because this is a rare form of methodology.

 

Introduction:

• Paragraph 1 seems incomplete. Please expound, elaborate, and cite more literature on why authors claim that Moringa improves the well-being of low-income communities. Also, elaborate on the taxonomy by including the family. Include studies that show the extent of research done on the other parts of Moringa.
• The second paragraph should focus on Moringa seeds, your research gap on the lack of studies. In here, you can also include significant findings on the typical uses of Moringa seeds. This will justify your search keywords and themes in the methodology.
• The current third paragraph is more of a result/discussion rather than an introduction. Please consider replacing this section with a more explicit aim, objectives, and significance of your study.
• Figure 1 is not cited in any part of the introduction. Please ensure that Figure 1 (usually in the first paragraph) is mentioned in the text. If possible, include an image of the whole plant and replace it with a higher-resolution image.

 

Methodology:

• Exclusion and inclusion criteria should be clarified. What type of papers were included (reviews or original articles?), language, year, etc?
• Justify the use of SALSA instead of typical tools like PRISMA or comprehensive reviews.
• The authors had indicated a total of 80 papers, but only 49 references were included. Please justify.

 

Results:

• Results can be improved if each themes have corresponding tables that summarize all the studies that have been included for each theme. In that way, readers can easily follow the flow of the narrative.
• Section 3. Applications and uses of Moringa oleifera seeds for water treatment. The current narrative is quite complex to comprehend since this section is a summary of the review and patched up narratives of each studies included. To improve this, come up with a short introduction on why water treatment is necessary and why alternatives are essential for sustainability. Also, provide more context about the survey conducted by the cited paper, including setting, preparation of the moringa seeds, treatment/s, controls, and outcomes, in such a way that the readers can fully comprehend. Finally, synthesize the key points from this section to demonstrate how moringa seeds can contribute to a sustainable solution.
• The same thing goes for sections 4 and 5.
• Table 1 should be included in the results section, and it would be more potent if the texts and functions indicated are cited accordingly.
• Authors can also include study limitations and future directions.

 

Conclusion:

• Conclusion is okay since research findings back it up.

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for the valuable and constructive comments provided. All suggestions have been carefully addressed to improve the clarity, depth, and overall quality of the manuscript.

• The abstract has been revised to better highlight the methodology (including the databases consulted), the main findings observed during the review process, and the significance of this article.

• The introduction has been expanded with additional references explaining the role of Moringa oleifera in improving community well-being and its taxonomic context. In addition, the focus on seed applications and existing research gaps has been strengthened. Regarding the figures, all of them are now properly cited in the corresponding sections, and a photograph of the plant has been added as suggested.

• The methodology section now clearly explains the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the type and language of the reviewed articles, and provides justification for the use of the SALSA method instead of PRISMA. The discrepancy in the number of included papers has also been clarified.

• In the results, each thematic section (water treatment, agriculture, and food applications) has been expanded with additional context, detailed descriptions of the studies (sample type, seed preparation, treatments, and results), and summary tables that synthesize the main findings for easier reading.

• The limitations and future research directions have been added at the end of the results section.

• Finally, the conclusion has been refined to better summarize the main outcomes and emphasize the multidisciplinary potential of Moringa oleifera seeds.

We are deeply grateful for the reviewer’s insightful feedback, which significantly contributed to improving the structure, scientific rigor of this review article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The reviewed evidence of studies consistently supports the multifunctional role of 338 
Moringa oleifera seeds as a strategic resource in priority areas for sustainable development.

I think this is a very well-written piece of work. The language used in the article is very good. I think it was written very well.

For Moringa oleifera Lam. Seed, some reviews have been reported. This review provided an overview of their functional value, potential applications, and associated limitations and prospects for sustain able use. The language of the entire article needs to be revised.

1. The wording “multipurpose potential, especially in resource-limited settings” need to be revised and to elaborate it.
2. The wording “and associated limitations and prospects for sustainable use.” need to be revised
3. Why the review window is the period 2020-2025? Add more time slots are suitable.
4. For methodological strategy SALSA (Search, Appraise, Synthesize, Analyze), proposed by Booth [4]. If others have conducted reviews using this method, please cite them.
5. For conclusion, explain how many cases were used
6. Overall, this article uses too few case studies and the cited literature is not sufficiently comprehensive.

Author Response

We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for their valuable time and constructive feedback, which has significantly contributed to improving the quality and clarity of our review. The manuscript has been carefully revised following all recommendations. Below is a summary of the modifications implemented in response to each specific comment.

1. “It is necessary to review and expand the sentence "multipurpose potential, particularly in resource-limited settings".
   - The phrase was revised for clarity and depth. The updated version now reads: “Moringa oleifera has been recognized for its adaptability, nutritional richness, and multipurpose potential, particularly in resource-limited regions.” Additional context was incorporated to highlight its contribution to sustainable development and rural resilience (Lines 12–15, 51–53).
2. “Please review the sentence: and the associated limitations and perspectives for sustainable use”
   - The sentence was revised for conciseness and clarity. The updated version now reads: “This review systematically and critically examines recent scientific literature on the use of M. oleifera seeds across these fields, emphasizing their functional value, applications, and challenges for sustainable use.” Additionally, a more comprehensive analysis of the main limitations was incorporated, particularly regarding the presence of antinutritional factors, consumer acceptability, and the scalability of nutraceutical applications. These aspects were discussed in greater depth in the food section of the manuscript (Lines 340–380), providing a more balanced perspective on both the potential and the constraints of MO seed utilization.
3. “Why does the review period cover 2020–2025? It would be advisable to include a broader range.”
   - The inclusion criteria have been updated to extend the review period from 2011 to 2025 to capture a broader and more representative range of studies. This change has been reflected in the Methodology section and ensured a more comprehensive literature base.
4. “For the SALSA methodological strategy (Search, Appraise, Synthesize, Analyze), proposed by Booth [4], if other authors have used this method, please cite them.”
   -Additional citations of studies that employed the SALSA approach were incorporated to strengthen the methodological foundation and subsequent applied reviews. The rationale for choosing SALSA over PRISMA was clarified, emphasizing its suitability for qualitative, interdisciplinary syntheses (Lines 85–92).
5. “To conclude, please explain how many cases were used.”
   - The total number of included studies (n = 58) is now explicitly indicated in the Methodology section, with details on selection criteria and thematic distribution.
6. “Overall, the article uses few case studies, and the cited bibliography is not sufficiently exhaustive.”
   - The revised manuscript now includes additional recent and relevant case studies (particularly from Latin America, Africa, and Asia) and expanded the bibliography to 59 references. Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3 were enriched with more detailed examples and quantitative data, ensuring a more exhaustive coverage of the topic.

General note:
We deeply appreciate the reviewer’s comments, which allowed us to enhance the manuscript’s structure, methodological rigor, and clarity. The revised version now offers a more comprehensive and coherent overview of Moringa oleifera seed applications for water treatment, agricultural fertilization, and nutraceutical development.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Nice work, congrats to authors.

Here are my suggestions for additional improvement of Manuscript.

Lines 33-42: Please provide more adequate references for all given statement. In general, Introduction section lacks in citations of previous works. Please update and expand during revision.

Line 39 and further in text: Since you introduce "MO" abbreviation for M. oleifera seed previously (which is great in order to avoid constant repeating of term) you should apply it consistently from here through a whole document. So, no need for repeating of "M. oleifera" term several time later also. Please revise a whole Manuscript.

Line 52: Suggest to add here "knowledge" after "existing".

Line 172 and further in text: Please, do not use term "heavy metals". It is meaningless and abandoned by IUPAC 20 years ago: https://doi.org/10.1351/pac200274050793. You can simple replace it with "potentially toxic elements" and with "PTEs" abbreviation. Please revise a whole document accordingly.

Line 214: It should be "chlorophylls" in plural here. Please correct.

Line 231: Same as previous for "minerals" here. Please correct.

Line 278: Please put term "in vitro" in Italic here.

Line 281: Please, replace term "polyphenols" with "phenolics" here. It is much more wider term and more appropriate in this context.

Line 292: Please, flavonoids are phenolic compounds. Therefore, it can be both here. Revise accordingly.

Kind regards.

Author Response

We sincerely thank Reviewer 3 for their positive evaluation and thoughtful suggestions, which have contributed to improving the overall clarity, consistency, and scientific precision of our manuscript. The following points summarize the specific modifications implemented according to each recommendation.

“Lines 33–42: Please provide more appropriate references for all statements. In general, the Introduction section lacks citations of previous work. Please update and expand the references accordingly.”
- The Introduction was substantially revised to include updated and more relevant references supporting the main claims about Moringa oleifera’s nutritional, environmental, and technological relevance. Recent works published between 2020 and 2024 were incorporated to strengthen the contextual framework (Lines 33–55). This update enhances the academic rigor and provides a stronger foundation for the subsequent discussion.

1. “Lines 39 and following: Since you already introduced the abbreviation ‘MO’ for M. oleifera, please apply it consistently throughout the document.”
   - The abbreviation “MO” has been used consistently throughout the revised manuscript to replace repetitive occurrences of M. oleifera, except in the first mention where the full scientific name is required (Lines 39 onward). This improves readability and stylistic uniformity.
2. “Line 52: Please add the word ‘knowledge’ after ‘existing.’”
   - The suggested word “knowledge” was added to clarify the sentence and improve precision. The revised phrase now reads: “This review summarizes the existing knowledge on the applications of MO seeds in water treatment, agriculture, and nutraceuticals.” (Line 52)
3. “Line 172 and following: Please avoid using the term ‘heavy metals.’ It has no clear definition and has been abandoned by IUPAC. Use ‘potentially toxic elements (PTEs)’ instead and apply consistently.”
   - We appreciate this important correction. The term “heavy metals” was replaced with “potentially toxic elements (PTEs)” throughout the manuscript, following the IUPAC recommendation (https://doi.org/10.1351/pac200274050793). This terminology update was applied consistently in all sections where these elements were discussed (Lines 172–190, Tables 1 and 2).
4. “Line 214: It should be ‘chlorophylls’ in plural. Please correct it.”
   - Corrected as suggested. The term “chlorophylls” now appears in plural form in the revised manuscript (Line 214).
5. “Line 231: The same applies for ‘minerals.’ Please correct it.”
   - The plural form “minerals” was adopted in the corresponding sentence (Line 231).
6. “Line 278: Please italicize the term in vitro.”
   - The term in vitro has been italicized throughout the text, including in Table 3 (Line 278).
7. “Line 281: Replace the term ‘polyphenols’ with ‘phenolics,’ as it is broader and more appropriate in this context.”
   - The term “phenolics” replaced “polyphenols” in the indicated section to ensure terminological accuracy and broader chemical coverage (Line 281).
8. “Line 292: Flavonoids are phenolic compounds; therefore, they can be both. Please revise accordingly.”
   - The sentence was rephrased to acknowledge that flavonoids are indeed a subclass of phenolic compounds, thereby ensuring scientific accuracy (Line 292).

General note:
We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s careful attention to detail. The suggested corrections have enhanced terminological precision, linguistic consistency, and bibliographic robustness, significantly strengthening the final quality of the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf