Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Black Cumin Seeds (Nigella sativa) on Performance, Carcass Traits, and Meat Quality of Japanese Quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Pls see the attached file.
REGARDS
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
To whom it may concern,
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for all comments and suggestions which may improve manuscript quality. The authors made changes to the text in line with the reviewers' renewed comments.
Reviewer 1
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript deals with a very topical issue: the attempt to reduce the use of antibiotics in livestock farming. This is not least against the background of the increasing occurrence of therapy-resistant germs in the human sector, which is attributed to antibiotic abuse in animal husbandry. The authors should have written one or two sentences on this. Instead, the emphasis is on the function of antibiotics as growth promoters. However, these have already been banned for many years, so that it cannot be the aim of this work to find a replacement. Instead, the focus should be more on the aspect of intestinal health.
The experimental design is clearly structured and has been implemented with sufficient precision. In the results section, however, there should not only be a juxtaposition of tables, but Tet should be inserted between the tables to summarise the most important results.
In the reproduction of the data, dimensions are sometimes missing. For example, it is not clear whether the BWG are given in grams or kilograms. It is of course understandable that it can only be grams, but for the sake of order, the dimension should be given here.
The English language also needs some revision here and there.
In addition to these general remarks, some specific indications are necessary:
Line 18 germs? Or do you mean bacteria?
Line 21 Nigella sativa please cursive
Line 25 supplemented group? Not the group was supplemented; group with 2% BCP diet
Line 31 especially feeding the 2% BCP diet
Line 46 growth promoters have not been allowed for a long time; nowadays it is a matter of reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock farming, especially in view of the resistant germs in the human sector.
Line 47 Escherichia coli
Line 63 Because of the fat deposition or storage
Line 76 e.g.
Line 93 delete the and before 1,3,8-p-acetic
Line 97 which have effects against fungi, bacteria, spasmodic, inflammation and analgesic effects as well
Line 111 NOHU ? first explain, than the abbreviation can be used
Line 113 were allocated into
Line 114 Mixed sex groups were put
Line 115 birds at the beginning was kept
Line 117 delete the comma behind weeks
Line 118 The diet contains 23% crude protein and 3100 Kcal metabolic energie/kg as fed, 0.92 g Ca/kg, 0.47 g P/kg and was supplemented without or with (without is the control, therefore it should be listed at first)
Line 127 1, 2 or 4%
Line 129 33 °C
Line 130 dito (use always a blank between the number and °C; also in the following text)
Line 174 Chronometer or chromometer
Line 196 second line in the table: control and 1% BCP are fat, 2 and 4% not
Line 206 table 2 should be table 1: first the feed intake than body weight gain (as it results from the feed intake)
Line 206 in the table: what is the dimension of BWG? g? kg? And feed intake (also gram?)
Line 218 Table 4 shows effects of…
Line 225 table 4 M and F: please one letter in the middle (as in table 3); the same for table 5
Line235 Table 6 shows
line 294 extensive information? à offers information…
line 295 effect on lipid….peroxidation during storage
line 311 Own data indicated that…
line 335 delete the blank behind chicken
line 351 pH values
line 369 delete the blank behind up the
line 360 The pH-values of the breast meat
line 415 pages?
Line 439 pages? Doi?
Line 458 Nigella sativa
Line 514 dito
Line 515 pages?
Line 516 Nigella sativa
Line 538 dito
Line 539 pages?
Author Response
To whom it may concern,
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for all comments and suggestions which may improve manuscript quality. The authors made changes to the text in line with the reviewers' renewed comments.
Review 2
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.docx