Next Article in Journal
Deficit Drip Irrigation in Processing Tomato Production in the Mediterranean Basin. A Data Analysis for Italy
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of Late-Maturing Peach and Nectarine Fruit Quality by Chemical, Physical, and Sensory Determinations
Previous Article in Journal
Eating Hamburgers Slowly and Sustainably: The Fast Food Market in North-West Italy
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Multi-Parameter Approach for Apricot Texture Analysis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Evaluation of the Optimum Harvesting Maturity of Makhwaen Fruit for the Perfumery Industry

Agriculture 2019, 9(4), 78; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture9040078
by Trid Sriwichai 1,2, Taepin Junmahasathien 3, Phumon Sookwong 4, Nuttha Potapohn 1 and Sarana Rose Sommano 1,2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Agriculture 2019, 9(4), 78; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture9040078
Submission received: 20 March 2019 / Revised: 11 April 2019 / Accepted: 11 April 2019 / Published: 17 April 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Postharvest Physiology and Technology of Fruits and Vegetables)

Round  1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript present interesting data, but introduction and conclusion should be improved.

the manuscript needs a strong english review by a mother-tongue.
M&M should be more detailed and more clear.

Author Response

From: Mr. Trid Sriwichai

Chiang Mai University, Department of  Plant and Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Re: Response to reviewer’s comment and suggestion agriculture-478367

Dear Editor-in-Chief of Agriculture

            We are gratefully appreciated the reviewer for the advices and thoughtful comments made to our manuscript.  We have carefully taken the comments in consideration to prepare our revision, which has resulted in a paper that is clearer and more compelling.  Below are our responses (in Bold type) to the Reviewer’s comments.  The page and numbers refer to our revised manuscript.

Reviewer #1: 

- The manuscript present interesting data, but introduction and conclusion should be improved.

TS: On behalf of all authors I would like to thanks for this admiration. We have edited the introduction and conclusion.

- The manuscript needs a strong English review by a mother-tongue.

TS: We have sent this article to language expert to check and edit the manuscript.

- M&M should be more detailed and more clear.

TS: We have gone through the materials and methods and given clearer detail particularly on to the sample collection.

Reviewer #2: 

- The manuscript does not respect the style required. Also a lot of errors are present: comma, dot, brackets and spaces not correctly used.

TS: We really apologize for using different Microsoft word processing. We have double checked and corrected the style  and possible typos.

- Please format the manuscript before submit it again.

TS: We have checked the manuscript throughout.

Reviewer #3: 

The authors of this paper described the makhwaen fruit harvested from different periods were used for investigating its aromatic profiles of essential oil.

The paper is well written, especially on the reason why these different makhwaen fruit samples (MK15-60) they used and the detail analysis of aromatic essential oil profile it did clearly described. However, the problem of this work occurrence might be important in case of the relationship of harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles of essential oil.

TS: We are appreciated the reviewer comment. In our previous version we only aimed at providing aromatic profiles for the consumer to comprehend. However, we totally agree with the reviewer and therefor revise the final goal of the manuscript by giving selected quality indicators as linkage between harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles.

- Author did not mention and demonstrate completely for providing new information especial on the suggestion of optimal harvesting time and any suggested indicator metabolite for use to obtain good quality fruits in terms of their chemical sensory evaluation.

TS: We have added the discussion regarding the indicator metabolites to obtain good quality essential oil based up on their chemical and sensory evaluation and some literatures. The major compounds of the essential oil were sabinene and limonene representing the unique woody and citrus aroma of makhwaen (Line 163-164).

- Besides, in their result of NIR analysis authors they did not provide any explanation why NIR analysis cannot discriminate the differences of samples with various harvesting periods?

In principle, NIR analysis it can be used for evaluation of the difference on the above different samples.

TS: The NIR spectrum is only able to distinguish the differences among the essential oil types of different chemical fingerprint i.e., different plant species.  Our result confirmed that the extracted oils were from the same plant species and the combination of chemical patterns were similar.  The explanation is added in Line 199-205.

- Finally, if the chemical-sensory evaluation was developed herein, how late the harvesting time is suggested by their model?

TS: We have identified the maximum harvesting time is 60 days after fruiting as the latest to obtain the citrus and woody aromas. The information is given in line  223-225.

I suggest author to respond above concerns carefully if editor will consider accepting this manuscript.

Other comments:

- In the material and methods, section of 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, there are many parentheses used incorrectly in the context. Please correct those typo errors.

            TS: we have checked and corrected the errors.

Once again, thank you very much for the consideration of the manuscript and I hope with all these changes and improvement, it would now meet standard for publication of the journal.

Regards,

Trid  Sriwichai

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript does not respect the style required. Also a lot of errors are present: comma, dot, brackets and spaces not correctly used.

Please format the manuscript before submit it again

Author Response

From: Mr. Trid Sriwichai

Chiang Mai University, Department of  Plant and Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Re: Response to reviewer’s comment and suggestion agriculture-478367

Dear Editor-in-Chief of Agriculture

            We are gratefully appreciated the reviewer for the advices and thoughtful comments made to our manuscript.  We have carefully taken the comments in consideration to prepare our revision, which has resulted in a paper that is clearer and more compelling.  Below are our responses (in Bold type) to the Reviewer’s comments.  The page and numbers refer to our revised manuscript.

Reviewer #1: 

- The manuscript present interesting data, but introduction and conclusion should be improved.

TS: On behalf of all authors I would like to thanks for this admiration. We have edited the introduction and conclusion.

- The manuscript needs a strong English review by a mother-tongue.

TS: We have sent this article to language expert to check and edit the manuscript.

- M&M should be more detailed and more clear.

TS: We have gone through the materials and methods and given clearer detail particularly on to the sample collection.

Reviewer #2: 

- The manuscript does not respect the style required. Also a lot of errors are present: comma, dot, brackets and spaces not correctly used.

TS: We really apologize for using different Microsoft word processing. We have double checked and corrected the style  and possible typos.

- Please format the manuscript before submit it again.

TS: We have checked the manuscript throughout.

Reviewer #3: 

The authors of this paper described the makhwaen fruit harvested from different periods were used for investigating its aromatic profiles of essential oil.

The paper is well written, especially on the reason why these different makhwaen fruit samples (MK15-60) they used and the detail analysis of aromatic essential oil profile it did clearly described. However, the problem of this work occurrence might be important in case of the relationship of harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles of essential oil.

TS: We are appreciated the reviewer comment. In our previous version we only aimed at providing aromatic profiles for the consumer to comprehend. However, we totally agree with the reviewer and therefor revise the final goal of the manuscript by giving selected quality indicators as linkage between harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles.

- Author did not mention and demonstrate completely for providing new information especial on the suggestion of optimal harvesting time and any suggested indicator metabolite for use to obtain good quality fruits in terms of their chemical sensory evaluation.

TS: We have added the discussion regarding the indicator metabolites to obtain good quality essential oil based up on their chemical and sensory evaluation and some literatures. The major compounds of the essential oil were sabinene and limonene representing the unique woody and citrus aroma of makhwaen (Line 163-164).

- Besides, in their result of NIR analysis authors they did not provide any explanation why NIR analysis cannot discriminate the differences of samples with various harvesting periods?

In principle, NIR analysis it can be used for evaluation of the difference on the above different samples.

TS: The NIR spectrum is only able to distinguish the differences among the essential oil types of different chemical fingerprint i.e., different plant species.  Our result confirmed that the extracted oils were from the same plant species and the combination of chemical patterns were similar.  The explanation is added in Line 199-205.

- Finally, if the chemical-sensory evaluation was developed herein, how late the harvesting time is suggested by their model?

TS: We have identified the maximum harvesting time is 60 days after fruiting as the latest to obtain the citrus and woody aromas. The information is given in line  223-225.

I suggest author to respond above concerns carefully if editor will consider accepting this manuscript.

Other comments:

- In the material and methods, section of 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, there are many parentheses used incorrectly in the context. Please correct those typo errors.

            TS: we have checked and corrected the errors.

Once again, thank you very much for the consideration of the manuscript and I hope with all these changes and improvement, it would now meet standard for publication of the journal.

Regards,

Trid  Sriwichai

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors of this paper described the makhwaen fruit harvested from different periods were used for investigating its aromatic profiles of essential oil.

The paper is well written, especially on the reason why these different makhwaen fruit samples (MK15-60) they used and the detail analysis of aromatic essential oil profile it did clearly described. However, the problem of this work occurrence might be important in case of the relationship of harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles of essential oil. Author did not mention and demonstrate completely for providing new information especial on the suggestion of optimal harvesting time and any suggested indicator metabolite for use to obtain good quality fruits in terms of their chemical-sensory evaluation. Besides, in their result of NIR analysis authors they did not provide any explanation why NIR analysis cannot discriminate the differences of samples with various harvesting periods? In principle, NIR analysis it can be used for evaluation of the difference on the above different samples. Finally, if the chemical-sensory evaluation was developed herein, how late the harvesting time is suggested by their model? I suggest author to respond above concerns carefully if editor will consider accepting this manuscript.

Other comments:

1.     In the material and methods, section of 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, there are many parentheses used incorrectly in the context. Please correct those typo errors.

Author Response

9th  April 2019

From: Mr. Trid Sriwichai

Chiang Mai University, Department of  Plant and Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Re: Response to reviewer’s comment and suggestion agriculture-478367

Dear Editor-in-Chief of Agriculture

            We are gratefully appreciated the reviewer for the advices and thoughtful comments made to our manuscript.  We have carefully taken the comments in consideration to prepare our revision, which has resulted in a paper that is clearer and more compelling.  Below are our responses (in Bold type) to the Reviewer’s comments.  The page and numbers refer to our revised manuscript.

Reviewer #1: 

- The manuscript present interesting data, but introduction and conclusion should be improved.

TS: On behalf of all authors I would like to thanks for this admiration. We have edited the introduction and conclusion.

- The manuscript needs a strong English review by a mother-tongue.

TS: We have sent this article to language expert to check and edit the manuscript.

- M&M should be more detailed and more clear.

TS: We have gone through the materials and methods and given clearer detail particularly on to the sample collection.

Reviewer #2: 

- The manuscript does not respect the style required. Also a lot of errors are present: comma, dot, brackets and spaces not correctly used.

TS: We really apologize for using different Microsoft word processing. We have double checked and corrected the style  and possible typos.

- Please format the manuscript before submit it again.

TS: We have checked the manuscript throughout.

Reviewer #3: 

The authors of this paper described the makhwaen fruit harvested from different periods were used for investigating its aromatic profiles of essential oil.

The paper is well written, especially on the reason why these different makhwaen fruit samples (MK15-60) they used and the detail analysis of aromatic essential oil profile it did clearly described. However, the problem of this work occurrence might be important in case of the relationship of harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles of essential oil.

TS: We are appreciated the reviewer comment. In our previous version we only aimed at providing aromatic profiles for the consumer to comprehend. However, we totally agree with the reviewer and therefor revise the final goal of the manuscript by giving selected quality indicators as linkage between harvesting maturity and aromatic profiles.

- Author did not mention and demonstrate completely for providing new information especial on the suggestion of optimal harvesting time and any suggested indicator metabolite for use to obtain good quality fruits in terms of their chemical sensory evaluation.

TS: We have added the discussion regarding the indicator metabolites to obtain good quality essential oil based up on their chemical and sensory evaluation and some literatures. The major compounds of the essential oil were sabinene and limonene representing the unique woody and citrus aroma of makhwaen (Line 163-164).

- Besides, in their result of NIR analysis authors they did not provide any explanation why NIR analysis cannot discriminate the differences of samples with various harvesting periods?

In principle, NIR analysis it can be used for evaluation of the difference on the above different samples.

TS: The NIR spectrum is only able to distinguish the differences among the essential oil types of different chemical fingerprint i.e., different plant species.  Our result confirmed that the extracted oils were from the same plant species and the combination of chemical patterns were similar.  The explanation is added in Line 199-205.

- Finally, if the chemical-sensory evaluation was developed herein, how late the harvesting time is suggested by their model?

TS: We have identified the maximum harvesting time is 60 days after fruiting as the latest to obtain the citrus and woody aromas. The information is given in line  223-225.

I suggest author to respond above concerns carefully if editor will consider accepting this manuscript.

Other comments:

- In the material and methods, section of 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, there are many parentheses used incorrectly in the context. Please correct those typo errors.

            TS: we have checked and corrected the errors.

Once again, thank you very much for the consideration of the manuscript and I hope with all these changes and improvement, it would now meet standard for publication of the journal.

Regards,

Trid  Sriwichai

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round  2

Reviewer 2 Report

Acceptable for publication

Author Response

11th  April 2019

From: Mr. Trid Sriwichai

Chiang Mai University, Department of  Plant and Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Re: Response to reviewer’s comment and suggestion agriculture-478367

Dear Editor-in-Chief of Agriculture

            We are gratefully appreciated the reviewer for the advices and thoughtful comments made to our manuscript.  We have carefully taken the comments in consideration to prepare our revision, which has resulted in a paper that is clearer and more compelling.  Below are our responses (in Bold type) to the Reviewer’s comments.  The page and numbers refer to our revised manuscript.

*After having a look at the current manuscript myself, I found a couple of minor details which should be ammended before final acceptance:

* Lines 42 and 44: If I am not misunderstanding the text, you are apparently using the term "aliment" to mean "health problem". Please note that this is not correct: "aliment" means "food type". Therefore please check the whole manuscript for the use of this word and replace where necessary.

TS: We meant to use the term ailment not aliment. We have checked error throughout and corrected them all.

* Please add the names of all coauthors at the first page of the manuscript. At the current version, only the affiliations appear.

TS: The names of all authors have been added.

Once again, thank you very much for the consideration of the manuscript and I hope with all these changes and improvement, it would now meet standard for publication of the journal.

Regards,

Trid  Sriwichai

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop