Next Article in Journal
Effects of Nutritional Interventions on Cardiovascular Disease Health Outcomes in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: A Scoping Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Mokko Lactone Attenuates Doxorubicin-Induced Hepatotoxicity in Rats: Emphasis on Sirt-1/FOXO1/NF-κB Axis
Previous Article in Journal
Analysis of Eating Habits and Body Composition of Young Adult Poles
Previous Article in Special Issue
Grifola frondosa (Maitake) Extract Reduces Fat Accumulation and Improves Health Span in C. elegans through the DAF-16/FOXO and SKN-1/NRF2 Signalling Pathways
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Coix Seed Consumption Affects the Gut Microbiota and the Peripheral Lymphocyte Subset Profiles of Healthy Male Adults

Nutrients 2021, 13(11), 4079; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13114079
by Minami Jinnouchi, Taisei Miyahara and Yoshio Suzuki *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Nutrients 2021, 13(11), 4079; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13114079
Submission received: 22 October 2021 / Revised: 11 November 2021 / Accepted: 11 November 2021 / Published: 15 November 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Firstly, I would like to congratulate you on an attempt to discuss such an important topic and to present the findings. I sincerely hope that this comments/suggestion assist in the improvements of the manuscript.

 

Major:

  1. The manuscript contains number of grammatical and academic expression errors as well as some typographical errors that will require to be corrected. In saying this, the approaches used for the methodological aspect are very interesting and appropriate. Congratulations to the team I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your work.
  2. I would suggest that authors also include nutritional intake analysis in their results sections in particular macronutrient breakdown of the diet at start and at the end of the treatment for both groups. Any changes in diet should also reflect the changes in gut, inflammatory markers as well.
  3. Did authors collect any physical exercise data as this can be also considered as influential capacity of the observed (not/observed) findings.
  4. The structure of the introduction section is somewhat non-organized and it would be beneficial to include more “logical flow” of the hypothesis development. For example, authors are drawing most of the information from only one review (REF 4). The problem with this is that comprehensive reviews only summarize the studies and I suggest that for this type of article, original studies are used with clear indications towards the developed hypothesis. Furthermore, the introduction section will require ‘back-up’ with references for several statements.

 

Minor:

  1. Authors should consider consistent referencing.
  2. Figure 1 and 2 will require higher resolution in particular Figure 2B

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The current manuscript is interesting. However, in order to publish, the authors need to improve some items as below:

-The relationship between skin infection and gut microbiota/immunity is not clear. It should be explained briefly in the abstract and introduction.

-According to the findings, the conclusion of the abstract also needs to modify.

-The introductory part of the discussion section is to be rewritten in order to make it clearer.

- A schematic diagram of the summary is recommended and cited in the conclusion section as a figure.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop