Genetic and Seasonal Factors Influence Pungent Pepper Capsaicinoid and Vitamin C Content

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

L'article a une base scientifique médicale sur le terrain et le laboratoire, qui justifie le travail, qui nécessite de réviser certains détails de forme dans le traitement des événements.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editors

International Journal Horticulture

Manuscript horticulturae-3485216 “ Impact of genetic and climate factors, prior to harvest,

on capsa-2 icinoid and vitamin C content in different genotypes of pun-3 gent peppers” by

Ingrid M. Gyalai, Lajos Helyes, Hussein G. Daood, Flórián Kovács, Adrienn Szarvas and Ferenc

Lantos.

 

Once the article has been reviewed, I send the report with the comments to the authors.

- Lines 85-112 page 3:

The writing of agronomic conditions for production is very extensive. Paragraphs should not

be very long; a maximum of 10 to 12 lines is recommended. It is recommended to summarize

these conditions or include a table with the fertilization demands and seasons.

Done. See line 95-98. We added a table. (See Supplementary Table S1)

 

- Lines 127-132 page 4:

Specify the storage conditions (time, temperature, light, etc.) in the boxes during the two weeks before processing the samples.

Dear Reviewer,

This part is revised to be clear, including the conditions during post-harvest storage to reach the technological ripeness (Hungarian traditional step before drying and milling). Storage was in M10-sized boxes in a specially designed storage room for peppers in a ventilated area. The temperature here was between 20 and 23 degrees Celsius, and it was a light-proof place. In these boxes, the peppers are turned over by hand every two or three days.

 

Specify which quality parameters the samples must meet, since if they are not processed in a homogeneous state of maturity or over-ripeness, all the samples could not be compared with each other or due to the effect of climatic conditions, since the biochemical components vary depending on the state of maturity.

Dear Reviewer,

As mentioned in the previous point, the peppers were subjected to overripening after harvest to reach homogeneous technological ripeness, with which quality parameters mainly carotenoids, antioxidants, heat principles, and flavoring materials are accomplished. In Hungary, due to environmental factors, it is difficult for the peppers to oner-ripen on plants, therefore overripening is necessary. This step makes the pepper fruits ready for drying and milling.

 

 

Justify the drying process of samples, vitamin C is oxidized by the effects of temperature, oxygen availability, etc., so leaving it to dry at that temperature for 24 hours degrades vitamin C and the real data would not be quantified to make comparisons.

Dear Reviewer,

Of course, raw peppers have a higher vitamin C content, and drying causes degradation depending on genetic and processing conditions. However, the drying temperature up to 60 °C causes minimal loss according to previous studies on sweet and pungent spice red peppers (this information is added to the text in discussion of vitamin C) (see added reference 46). Also, Sigge et al. (1999) investigated the optimum quality of peppers at different drying temperatures, where maximum retention of color and L-ascorbic acid) was achieved at drying conditions of 55 and 60C (15-40% RH) and 65 and 70C (15% RH), and Reis et al. (2013) found that drying temperatures of 45-65C had no significant effect on vitamin C content. (If the editorial board of Horticulturae agrees to add the later two references, we can modify the relevant paragraph and the list of references.)

Specify if tests were carried out on the effect of drying with temperature on the concentration of vitamin C. When working with bioactive compounds, drying processes are recommended and it is mandatory to work with lyophilization systems in the absence of light.

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,

Only one less harmful thermal drying at 60 °C was tested.

 

All typeset errors have been corrected by the English spelling and grammar-correcting Grammarly premium program.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript “Impact of genetic and climate factors, prior to harvest, on capsaicinoid and vitamin C content in different genotypes of pungent peppers” is based on an impressive data set and the subject is appropriate for the journal. The manuscript suffers from three major issues that demand a complete revision. In addition, there are many formatting mistakes indicating the authors did not pay attention to MDPI formatting requirements.

First, the authors have attributed the seasonal differences to temperature, rainfall, and sunlight. This is not appropriate because the influence of season on capsaicinoid and vitamin C could have been any number of factors. The manuscript should be rewritten to attribute the differences to season. The factors that caused season to be significant are speculative. So the data on rainfall, temperature, and sunlight should be discussed as the “possible” factors that caused the seasonal differences.

Second, the GLM ANOVA is not described in the methods section and the ANOVA results are completely missing from the results section. Instead, the authors jumped straight to means separation among cultivars and seasons without telling the reader if the factors were significant in the ANOVA. Each subsection of Section 3 must begin with the results of the ANOVA. If the interaction between the main factors of cultivar and season were not significant, then the means of each cultivar and the means of each season cannot be separated. The authors need to hire a statistician to sort this out for them.

Third, the manuscript has many incomplete sentences or rambling sentences that make no sense. There are too many to point them out. The authors need to hire a native English speaker to help with the writing.

In addition to these three major issues, the manuscript also suffers from numerous minor mistakes.

The title is much too long. I suggest “Genetic and seasonal factors influence pungent pepper capsaicinoid and vitamin C content.”

The abstract is missing a conclusions sentence.

The genus and species names are not italicized in most of the manuscript.

The major headings should be bold and 10 font. Many are not correct.

The minor headings should be italicized and 10 font. All of them are not correct.

The Introduction has incorrect line spacing.

The entire manuscript after line 85 is left justified. It should be fully justified.

The Introduction is poorly written. Lines 74-81 should be completely rewritten.

Line 104. What is  Solinure 5 G?

Line 108. Start a new paragraph on water.

Line 182. This is where the ANOVA factors should be delineated and how the ANOVA factorial was set up.

Line 255. Figure 5.

Line 288. Table 2 not Table 1.

Line 335. Table 3 not Table 1.

Line 390. Table 4 not Table 1.

Line 417. Figure 6 is cited here but there is no Figure 6 in the manuscript.

Line 499. Every reference is incorrectly formatted.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Numerous sentences are incomplete. Many sentences are too long and rambling.

Author Response

Open Review

(x) I would not like to sign my review report
( ) I would like to sign my review report

Quality of English Language

( ) The English is fine and does not require any improvement.
(x) The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

 

	Yes	Can be improved	Must be improved	Not applicable
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	(x)	( )	( )	( )
Is the research design appropriate?	( )	( )	(x)	( )
Are the methods adequately described?	( )	( )	(x)	( )
Are the results clearly presented?	( )	( )	(x)	( )
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	(x)	( )	( )	( )

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript “Impact of genetic and climate factors, prior to harvest, on capsaicinoid and vitamin C content in different genotypes of pungent peppers” is based on an impressive data set and the subject is appropriate for the journal. The manuscript suffers from three major issues that demand a complete revision. In addition, there are many formatting mistakes indicating the authors did not pay attention to MDPI formatting requirements.

First, the authors have attributed the seasonal differences to temperature, rainfall, and sunlight. This is not appropriate because the influence of season on capsaicinoid and vitamin C could have been any number of factors. The manuscript should be rewritten to attribute the differences to season. The factors that caused season to be significant are speculative. So the data on rainfall, temperature, and sunlight should be discussed as the “possible” factors that caused the seasonal differences.

Answer

Dear Reviewer,

Each of the cultivation factors (irrigation, nutrient replenishment, foliar fertilizer, plant protection), processing, storage, and testing procedures were carried out in the same way. The only difference was the varieties. This allowed us to conclude that the difference in the measured results was due to environmental factors and genetic differences, since we had two completely different growing years in terms of weather, but the varieties and technology were the same. In the revised MS, we used expressions like “most probably, most likely to affect and so on.”

Second, the GLM ANOVA is not described in the methods section and the ANOVA results are completely missing from the results section. Instead, the authors jumped straight to means separation among cultivars and seasons without telling the reader if the factors were significant in the ANOVA. Each subsection of Section 3 must begin with the results of the ANOVA. If the interaction between the main factors of cultivar and season were not significant, then the means of each cultivar and the means of each season cannot be separated. The authors need to hire a statistician to sort this out for them.

Answer

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable feedback. The MANOVA was accepted based on Wilks' lambda, and partial eta squared was also provided as the effect size measure. The MANOVA model included three main factors: variety, year of harvest, and the time of harvest. For all three factors, we examined their significance in affecting the dependent variables. Additionally, we investigated the interactions between these factors. When Wilks' lambda is significant, we can be confident that the three factors had a strong impact on the dependent variables. In supplementary part we added the required table  of the MANOVA . (Supplementary Table S2)

We have fully revised this section see: Line 253-262.

 

Third, the manuscript has many incomplete sentences or rambling sentences that make no sense. There are too many to point them out. The authors need to hire a native English speaker to help with the writing.

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comment. We completed those sentences.

In addition to these three major issues, the manuscript also suffers from numerous minor mistakes.

Done: We corrected the text by using an English spelling and grammar correction program.

The title is much too long. I suggest “Genetic and seasonal factors influence pungent pepper capsaicinoid and vitamin C content.”

Done. See line: 2-3.

The abstract is missing a conclusion sentence.

Done. See line: 36-38.

The genus and species names are not italicized in most of the manuscript.

Done.

The major headings should be bold and 10 font. Many are not correct.

Done.

The minor headings should be italicized and 10 font. All of them are not correct.

Done.

The Introduction has incorrect line spacing.

Done.

The entire manuscript after line 85 is left justified. It should be fully justified.

Done.

The Introduction is poorly written. Lines 74-81 should be completely rewritten.

Line 104. What is Solinure 5 G?

Answer

Dear Reviewer, The introduction has been improved. The less relevant information with 3 references were removed and relevant information added with other references.

Solinhure 5 is a solid fertiliser with complex active ingredients that is completely soluble in water. Corrected and defined in the revised MS

 

Line 108. Start a new paragraph on water.

Done.

Line 182. This is where the ANOVA factors should be delineated and how the ANOVA factorial was set up.

Answer

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have revised this section accordingly.Since multiple dependent variables were included, we used MANOVA and assessed significance based on Wilks' lambda. See Line 171-181.

 

Line 255. Figure 5.

Done.

Line 288. Table 2 not Table 1.

Done. corrected

Line 335. Table 3 not Table 1.

Done. Corrected

Line 390. Table 4 not Table 1.

Done. Corrected

Line 417. Figure 6 is cited here but there is no Figure 6 in the manuscript.

Done. the missing figure is added to the text

Line 499. Every reference is incorrectly formatted.

Done.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Line 11 "Univerity" replace with  "University"

Line 13   Correcpondence erase this word

Line 16   "poly phenols" should be "polyphenols"       Check in whole text

 

Line 51 inflammatory [6] insert space before [6]

Line 61  "pubescence" correct to " pubescens"

Line 76-77  little are available do you mean „little information is available“

2.1. Experimental design

It will be good to insert photos of pepper plants with fruits or fruits of those 4 evaluated varieties

 

Line 114 replace species to varieties

Line 115  90cm insert space before cm

Line 119  fruits having                   fruits and have red color

 

2.3 Preparation of samples

Line 127  The fruit was kept       Did you keep only one fruit?

Please explain how many fruits did you use for biochemical analysis and insert in this part of article

Line 131     60°C.The dried           insert space

2.5. Statistical evaluation

You noted in the Table 1. that you use Tukey test. Please insert into this part.

 

Line 220-229

Table 1. In the first column the numbers overlap

All tables are Table 1 

Table 1 Number of fruits/plants  change to plant, weight (g/fruit) change to Fruit weight (g), Yield change to Fruit yield

Do you have SD, and statistical test for Number of fruits/plant and  Fruit weight (g)

 

Line 269 annum replace with " annuum"

Line 335 In this table the data are from 2022. Is it 2022 or 2023?

Table 1. Content of capsaicinoids In NDC column SD values are not visible, change coma to ful stop

Table 1. Line 391   harvess. Change to harvest

Caps/DC ratio 0,84 change coma to ful stop

Line 413 Vitamins change to Vitamin

Line 485  data curtation replace with data curation

Line after 493  jolokia replace with Jolokia

Line 502 annum replace with " annuum"

Line 571 "environmal"  replace with "environmental"

Line 572 "unferlying" replace with "underlying"

 

 

It is unclear whether the experiment was conducted using a randomized block design, or by other design.

There is no Fig 2. in the Supplementary file.
Additionally, it is not specified how the samples for chemical analysis were selected – were they taken from all repetitions or only from a specific part?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It would be good to send your work to a native English speaker for review.

Author Response

Open Review

(x) I would not like to sign my review report
( ) I would like to sign my review report

Quality of English Language

( ) The English is fine and does not require any improvement.
(x) The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

 

	Yes	Can be improved	Must be improved	Not applicable
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	(x)	( )	( )	( )
Is the research design appropriate?	( )	(x)	( )	( )
Are the methods adequately described?	( )	(x)	( )	( )
Are the results clearly presented?	( )	(x)	( )	( )
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	( )	(x)	( )	( )

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Line 11 "Univerity" replace with  "University"

Done. See line: 10.

Line 13   Correcpondence erase this word

Done. See line: 12

Line 16   "poly phenols" should be "polyphenols"       Check in whole text

Done. See line: 16.

Line 51 inflammatory [6] insert space before [6]

Done. See line: 52.

Line 61  "pubescence" correct to " pubescens"

Done. See line: 62.

Line 76-77  little are available do you mean „little information is available“

Done. See line: 77.

2.1. Experimental design

It will be good to insert photos of pepper plants with fruits or fruits of those 4 evaluated varieties

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable feedback.

Unfortunately, we did not take a photo of a quality that would allow us to compare the differences between the four different varieties.

Line 114 replace species to varieties

Done. See line: 107

Line 115  90cm insert space before cm

Done. See line: 108.

Line 119  fruits having                   fruits and have red color

 Done. See line: 112.

2.3 Preparation of samples

Line 127  The fruit was kept       Did you keep only one fruit?

Done. See line: 119.

Please explain how many fruits did you use for biochemical analysis and insert in this part of article

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable feedback.

For each variety and for each replicate, all ripe fruits were harvested, and one kilogram of each was dried and tested separately.

 

Line 131     60°C.The dried           insert space

Done. See line: 122-123.

2.5. Statistical evaluation

You noted in the Table 1. that you use Tukey test. Please insert into this part.

 Done. See line: 170-181.

Line 220-229

Table 1. In the first column the numbers overlap

Done. See line: 338-339. Table 3.

All tables are Table 1 

Table 1 Number of fruits/plants  change to plant, weight (g/fruit) change to Fruit weight (g), Yield change to Fruit yield

Done. See line: 214.

Do you have SD, and statistical test for Number of fruits/plant and  Fruit weight (g)

Done. See line: 213-223, Table 1.

Line 269 annum replace with " annuum"

Done. See line: 272.

Line 335 In this table the data are from 2022. Is it 2022 or 2023?

Is it Table 3. It is 2023.

Table 1. Content of capsaicinoids In NDC column SD values are not visible, change coma to ful stop

Done. See line: 337-339. Table 3.

Table 1. Line 391   harvess. Change to harvest

Done. See line: 385.

Caps/DC ratio 0,84 change coma to ful stop

Done. See line: 385-386.

Line 413 Vitamins change to Vitamin

Done. See line: 405.

Line 485  data curtation replace with data curation

Done. See line: 477

Line after 493  jolokia replace with Jolokia

Done. See line: 485-486

Line 502 annum replace with " annuum"

Done. See line: 496.

Line 571 "environmal"  replace with "environmental"

Done. See line: 563

Line 572 "unferlying" replace with "underlying"

 Done. See line: 564.

It is unclear whether the experiment was conducted using a randomized block design, or by other design.

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable feedback.

We used a randomized block design.

There is no Fig 2. in the Supplementary file.
Additionally, it is not specified how the samples for chemical analysis were selected – were they taken from all repetitions or only from a specific part?

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable feedback.

The figures and tables are arranged in the text and supplementary part.

For each variety and for each replicate, all ripe fruits were harvested, and one kilogram of each was dried and tested. Separately per replicate, per variety 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have done an excellent job with the revision. The inclusion of the ANOVA results and the manner in which the ANOVA was discussed in the text has fully corrected that deficiency in the first version. 

In general, my feeling is the experimental approach was much more complicated than it should have been. More simple experimental approaches would have made the findings much more digestible to the reader. 

The manuscript still has many formatting mistakes such as line spacing, font size, and margin mistakes. I assume the production editors can correct these avoidable mistakes. The authors are encouraged to pay more attention to manuscript formatting requirements in the future. 

 

Author Response

The manuscript “Impact of genetic and climate factors, prior to harvest, on capsaicinoid and vitamin C content in different genotypes of pungent peppers” is based on an impressive data set, and the subject is appropriate for the journal. The manuscript suffers from three major issues that demand a complete revision. In addition, there are many formatting mistakes indicating the authors did not pay attention to MDPI formatting requirements.

First, the authors have attributed the seasonal differences to temperature, rainfall, and sunlight. This is not appropriate because the influence of season on capsaicinoid and vitamin C could have been any number of factors. The manuscript should be rewritten to attribute the differences to season. The factors that caused season to be significant are speculative. So the data on rainfall, temperature, and sunlight should be discussed as the “possible” factors that caused the seasonal differences.

Answer

Dear Reviewer,

Each of the cultivation factors (irrigation, nutrient replenishment, foliar fertilizer, plant protection), processing, storage, and testing procedures were carried out in the same way. The only difference was the varieties. This allowed us to conclude that the difference in the measured results was due to environmental factors and genetic differences, since we had two completely different growing years in terms of weather, but the varieties and technology were the same. In the revised MS we used expressions like “most probably, most likely to affect and so on”

Second, the GLM ANOVA is not described in the methods section and the ANOVA results are completely missing from the results section. Instead, the authors jumped straight to means separation among cultivars and seasons without telling the reader if the factors were significant in the ANOVA. Each subsection of Section 3 must begin with the results of the ANOVA. If the interaction between the main factors of cultivar and season were not significant, then the means of each cultivar and the means of each season cannot be separated. The authors need to hire a statistician to sort this out for them.

Answer

The MANOVA was accepted based on Wilks' lambda, and partial eta squared was also provided as the effect size measure. The MANOVA model included three main factors: variety, year of harvest, and the time of harvest. For all three factors, we examined their significance in affecting the dependent variables. Additionally, we investigated the interactions between these factors. When Wilks' lambda is significant, we can be confident that the three factors had a strong impact on the dependent variables. In the supplementary part, we added the required table of the MANOVA. Supplementary Table S2). We have fully revised this section; see Line 253-262.

 

Third, the manuscript has many incomplete sentences or rambling sentences that make no sense. There are too many to point them out. The authors need to hire a native English speaker to help with the writing.

Answer

Thank you for your comment. We competed those sentences.

In addition to these three major issues, the manuscript also suffers from numerous minor mistakes.

Done: We corrected the text by using an English spelling and grammar correction program.

The title is much too long. I suggest “Genetic and seasonal factors influence pungent pepper capsaicinoid and vitamin C content.”

Done. See line: 2-3.

The abstract is missing a conclusion sentence.

Answer:Done. See line: 36-38.

The genus and species names are not italicized in most of the manuscript.

Answer: Corrected

The major headings should be bold and 10 fonts. Many are not correct.

Answer: Done.

The minor headings should be italicized and 10 font. All of them are not correct.

Corrected

The introduction has incorrect line spacing.

Corrected

The entire manuscript after line 85 is left justified. It should be fully justified.

Answer: Done.

The introduction is poorly written. Lines 74-81 should be completely rewritten.

Line 104. What is Solinure 5 G?

Answer:

Dear Reviewer, The introduction has been improved. The less relevant information with 3 references were removed and relevant information added with other references.  Solinhure 5 is a solid fertilizer with complex active ingredients that is completely soluble in water. Corrected and defined in the revised MS

Line 108. Start a new paragraph on water.

Answer?Done.

Line 182. This is where the ANOVA factors should be delineated and how the ANOVA factorial was set up.

Answer:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have revised this section accordingly.Since multiple dependent variables were included, we used MANOVA and assessed significance based on Wilks' lambda. See Line 171-181.

 

Line 255. Figure 5. Answer Done.

Line 288. Table 2 not Table 1 Answer: Done.

Line 335. Table 3 not Table 1.

Answer: Corrected

Line 390. Table 4 not Table 1 Answer: Corrected

Line 417. Figure 6 is cited here, but there is no Figure 6 in the manuscript.

Answer: Done. the missing figure is added to the text

Line 499. Every reference is incorrectly formatted.

Done.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Line 111 and Table 1. jolokia replace with Jolokia 

 

In a previous review I wroted "Please explain how many fruits did you use for biochemical analysis and insert in this part of article".

Answer:

For each variety and for each replicate, all ripe fruits were harvested, and one kilogram of each was dried and tested separately.

Insert this explanation into 2.1. Experimental design

 

In a previous review I wroted

It is unclear whether the experiment was conducted using a randomized block design, or by other design.

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable feedback.

We used a randomized block design.

Insert this explanation into 2.1. Experimental design

 

Author Response

Line 11 "Univerity" replace with  "University"

Done. See line: 10.

Line 13   Correcpondence, erase this word

Done. See line: 12

Line 16   "poly phenols" should be "polyphenols"       Check in whole text

Done. See line: 16.

Line 51 inflammatory [6] insert space before [6]

Done. See line: 52.

Line 61  "pubescence" correct to " pubescens"

Done. See line: 62.

Line 76-77  little are available do you mean „little information is available“

Done. See line: 77.

2.1. Experimental design

It will be good to insert photos of pepper plants with fruits or fruits of those 4 evaluated varieties

Answer:

Unfortunately, we did not take a photo of a quality that would allow us to compare the differences between the four different varieties.

Line 114 replace species to varieties

Done. See line: 107

Line 115  90cm insert space before cm

Done. See line: 108.

Line 119  fruits having                   fruits and have red color

Done. See line: 112.

2.3 Preparation of samples

Line 127  The fruit was kept       Did you keep only one fruit?

Done. See line: 119. fruit corrected to fruits

Please explain how many fruits did you used for biochemical analysis and insert in this part of article

Answer: For each variety and for each replicate, all ripe fruits were harvested, and one kilogram of each was dried and tested separately.

 

Line 131     60°C.The dried           insert space

Done. See line: 122-123.

2.5. Statistical evaluation

You noted in the Table 1. that you use Tukey test. Please insert into this part.

Done. See line: 170-181.

Line 220-229

Table 1. In the first column the numbers overlap

Done. See line: 338-339. Table 3.

All tables are Table 1 

Table 1: Number of fruits/plants  change to plant, weight (g/fruit) changes to Fruit weight (g), Yield change to Fruit yield

Done. See line: 214.

Do you have SD, and statistical test for Number of fruits/plant and  Fruit weight (g)

Done. See line: 213-223, Revised Table 1.

Line 269 annum replace with "annuum."

Done. See line: 272.

Line 335 In this table the data are from 2022. Is it 2022 or 2023?

Is it Table 3. Answer: Yes, it is 2023. Coprrected

Table 1. Content of capsaicinoids In NDC column SD values are not visible; change comma to full stop

Done. See line: 337-339. Table 3.

Table 1. Line 391   harvess. Change to harvest

Corrected. See line: 385.

Caps/DC ratio 0,84 change coma to ful stop

Done. See line: 385-386.

Line 413 Vitamins change to Vitamin

Done. See line: 405.

Line 485  data curtation replace with data curation

Done. See line: 477

Line after 493  jolokia replace with Jolokia

Done. See line: 485-486

Line 502 annum replace with " annuum"

Done. See line: 496.

Line 571 "environmal"  replace with "environmental"

Done. See line: 563

Line 572 "unferlying" replace with "underlying"

Done. See line: 564.

It is unclear whether the experiment was conducted using a randomized block design, or by other design.

Answer: We used randomized block design.

There is no Fig 2. in the Supplementary file.
Additionally, it is not specified how the samples for chemical analysis were selected – were they taken from all repetitions or only from a specific part?

Answer:

The figures and tables are arranged in the text and supplementary part. For each variety and for each replicate, all ripe fruits were harvested, and one kilogram of each was dried and tested. Separately per replicate, per variety and per harvest date