Examining the Impact of Substrate Composition on the Biochemical Properties and Antioxidant Activity of Pleurotus and Agaricus Mushrooms
, Katerina Fourtaka 2, Eirini Maria Melanouri 1,3, Marianna Dedousi 1,2, Ilias Diamantis 1, Chrysavgi Gardeli 2 and Seraphim Papanikolaou 3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript is “Examining the impact of substrate composition on the bio-chemical properties and antioxidant activity of Pleurotus and Agaricus mushrooms” (fermentation-2470208). Some detailed comments are as follows:
(1) Abstract: The research background and objective are missing in the abstract of the manuscript.
(2) Keywords: The keywords in the manuscript need to be revised, the “mushroom cultivation”, “agro-residues fermentation” and “nutritional characteristics” only appear very few frequently in the manuscript.
(3) Introduction: The research background of the topic was not well analyzed in the manuscript.
(4) Introduction: The research objective is not specific, so I suggest the author explain it in several points.
(5) Materials and Methods, Lines 117-120: The author did not explain the reason for using this material combination.
(6) Results and Discussion: The description in results and discussion chapter is confusing, and readers cannot distinguish between the author's finding and the finding in the references.
(7) Results and Discussion: Although the author has cited many references, the relevant analysis is not in-depth.
(8) Conclusions: There is no innovative revelation in the research conclusion, and the author needs to further summarize.
(9) Tables 1 to 5 should avoid being distributed on different pages.
(10) A proof reading by a native English speaker should be carefully conducted to improve both language and organization quality.
(11) The main body of the manuscript provides the author's name of the cited references, which is unnecessary.
(12) The format of the reference section needs to meet the requirements of the journal, and the author needs to check and modify it.
The language of this manuscript needs to be revised.
Author Response
Please see attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. Giving the section “Abbreviation” in the beginning of manuscript
2. Page 1, line 25: Giving the meaning of GAE.
3. Page 6: Giving a more section “Statistical Analysis”
4. Page 7, Figure 1: Labelling of servo coordinates, IPS (w/w d.w.) => IPS (%, w/w d.w.), the same as Figure 3 and 4.
5. Please discuss clearly the correlation or relationship between antioxidant activity and total phenolic compounds (TPC) or tocopherols.
Author Response
Please see attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript demonstrates the impact of different substrates on the biochemical properties of, phenolic content and antioxidant activity of different species of mushrooms. Overall, the manuscript is well compiled, well presented and publishable with minor corrections.
My few comments are below:
1. Please include in the Introduction how the substrates were chosen. Is there any background on selecting barley and oat straw, beech wood, coffee residues, rice bark and wheat straw?
2. Line 34, should be "have long been used as food.."
3. What are the environmental condition (such as temperature, and humidity during the mushroom growth? There are references provided, still would be better to add them in brief.
4. Please provide detail on the source of substrates and their composition as far as possible. This is because they are agricultural wastes and can vary in composition from source to source which could affect the final result. At least more information on these sources could be useful for future works.
Author Response
Please see attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The author has made efforts to make revisions as requested by the reviewers, but I believe that the language of this manuscript still needs to be revised before publication.
The language of this manuscript needs to be revised.
