Next Article in Journal
Effect of Metal Ions on the Interaction of Condensed Tannins with Protein
Previous Article in Journal
Substitution of Pork Fat by Emulsified Seed Oils in Fresh Deer Sausage (‘Chorizo’) and Its Impact on the Physical, Nutritional, and Sensory Properties
Previous Article in Special Issue
Food Credence Attributes: A Conceptual Framework of Supply Chain Stakeholders, Their Motives, and Mechanisms to Address Information Asymmetry
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Study of the Fermentation Characteristics of Non-Conventional Yeast Strains in Sweet Dough

by Evelyne Timmermans 1, Ine Langie 1, An Bautil 1, Kristof Brijs 1, Carolien Buvé 2, Ann Van Loey 2, Ilse Scheirlinck 3, Roel Van der Meulen 3 and Christophe M. Courtin 1,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Submission received: 30 November 2022 / Revised: 19 January 2023 / Accepted: 7 February 2023 / Published: 15 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Foods: 10th Anniversary)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper studies the potential of unconventional yeast strains in sweet dough, which provides a theoretical basis for improving the utilization of yeast resources in bread baking, and is an article of great practical significance. However, there are several issues that need improvement:

1. The detection conditions of ion exclusion high performance liquid chromatography can be described in detail. (lines 133 to 134)

2. It is recommended to supplement the volatiles of unfermented dough as a control.

3. There is a contradiction in the conclusion.  It states in the lines 308-311 that invertase activity affects sucrose consumption, while in lines 324-327 it states  that invertase has no effect on sugar consumption.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript provides information about the fermentation characteristics of non-conventional yeast strains from different food industries in sweet dough. The analytical work described in this paper was very well approached with the methodology used in the characterization of the above-mentioned process, and the interpretation of the data is sound. Since there is still incomplete knowledge about the usage of different yeast strains in bakery products, this type of study is justified. The paper is well-written, but some changes in revising their manuscript are advisable:

Abstract/ Conclusion: Please compare the given CO2 production range to the results in Table 2. 

Table 1. Technical error “Torulaspora delb.rückii”

Lines 217-225: Because the significance difference is not shown in Table 2, did the authors statistically analyze the obtained results?  Furthermore, the table shows that the T58 sample has similar values for the measured parameters to the SD sample. 

Lines 361- 370: Moreover, the baking process should also be taken into account. You already mentioned that latter in the manuscript, but as you state in this paragraph the reasons for the profile of volatile compounds between the dough and the finished product, it would be useful to add that part here as well.

Figure 4: Please indicate more clearly in the figure caption what differences in relative concentrations mean.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop