Edible Coatings to Prolong the Shelf Life and Improve the Quality of Subtropical Fresh/Fresh-Cut Fruits: A Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is very interesting, it is strongly supported, however, it should be consistent with what is described in the abstract, therefore it is recommended to strengthen it to generate greater impact. It is also recommended to verify the scientific names and the style of the bibliographic citations throughout the manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reviewer 1

Dear reviewer, thank you. Your suggestions were helpful in improving our article. The team of authors is very grateful to you.

The manuscript “Edible Coatings to Prolong the Shelf Life and Improve the Quality of Subtropical Fresh/Fresh-Cut Fruits: A Review.” presents relevant and substantiated information showing Coatings to Prolong the Shelf Life and Improve the Quality of Subtropical.

Abstract: Line 35: authors are encouraged to briefly describe the fruits addressed in this manuscript.

Lines 35-39.

Introduction Line 39-44, 50-64: It is strongly recommended that the authors enrich the introductory section, showing in an orderly manner the problems of the research work.  The introduction was expanded. Lines 80 to 146.

Line 75: authors are encouraged to complement the introduction with relevant background; examples of coatings on some subtropical fruits. Added to the text. Lines 80 to 93

Line 75-76: authors are encouraged to justify extensively why the ten fruits described in the manuscript were selected. Added to the text. Lines 305 to 321. The text notes that the most important subtropical fruits are reported in this manuscript.

Content

Line 79-80: it is recommended that the authors previously attach information on the factors that induce fruit loss; loss of moisture, CO2, ethylene, etc. Added to the text. Lines 137 to 145 and fig.1

Line 112: it is recommended that the authors, as a preamble, describe a classification of the different edible coatings. Added to the text. Lines 222 to 301 and fig.2

Line 151: change Perisa americana to Persea americana. Corrected

Line 219: Opuntia ficus-indica in italics. Corrected

Line 259: check citation style (Cenobio-Galindo et al. 2019). Corrected

Line 259: delete “,” in 3% calcium alginate coating on Brahee date palm fruits-maintained quality during storage. Corrected

Line 259: change 3 to subindex; AgNO3. Corrected

Line 259: homogenize citation style; Khafar et al. (2023)

Line 36, 259, 270, 271, 273, 306, 309, 384, 394: Aloe vera in italics; authors are advised to use Aloe vera as the scientific name.

Line 278: check citation style Naveed et al. Checked

Line 319: change (Pistachia vera) to Pistacia vera. Corrected

Line 383: homogenize citation style; Seifi and Bekran (2024)  Corrected

Line 383: check citation (Naveed et al. 2024a) Corrected

Line 151-257, 260-389: in the abstract (Line 26-28) the authors mention that the use of edible coatings poses challenges in terms of production, consumer acceptance, food safety, nutritional value, etc. Therefore, this information should be mentioned in the subtopics for each of the ten fruits; it isstrongly recommended that the authors add more detailed information and complement what is mentioned in the abstract. Or instead attach another subtopic, as a supplement, addressing the missing information. A subheading titled 3.11. Challenges of using edible coatings؛ was added to the text. A brief explanation of the relevant subheading is provided in Table 3. Lines 568 to 581.

Line 151-180: supplement information on consumer acceptance, food safety, nutritional value and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 181-214: complement the information with consumer acceptance and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 215-233: complement the information with consumer acceptance and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 234-255: complement the information with consumer acceptance and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 261-281: complement the information with consumer acceptance and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 283-298: complement the information with consumer acceptance and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 300-318: supplement information on consumer acceptance, nutritional value and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 319-346: complement the information with consumer acceptance and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 347-362: complement the information with consumer acceptance, food safety and production. Added subheading 3.11.

Line 363-389: complement the information with consumer acceptance, food safety and production. Added subheading 3.11.  

 

 

References Please review the style of the references in detail, following the journal's guidelines Corrected

Suggestion: Review citation style, review scientific names throughout the paper. The manuscript is very relevant and interesting; however, it is strongly recommended that the authors improve the manuscript by strengthening the introduction sections and the content section in each of the fruits, or add another subtopic including the missing information, so that there is coherence between the abstract, the introduction and the content. Suggestions applied.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall, the manuscript provides a comprehensive overview of the various edible coatings that can extend the shelf life and enhance the quality of subtropical fresh-cut fruits. The review is well-structured and includes a detailed discussion of the recent advancements in coating preservation technologies for various subtropical fresh-cut fruits. The review covers a wide range of topics related to application of edible coatings, but some sections may benefit from more in-depth analysis and discussion.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions that may help improve the manuscript:

1. Keywords: The initial letter is not capitalized.
2. Introduction: The introduction section effectively sets the stage for the review by discussingthe challenges in the storage of fresh-cut subtropical fruits and the feasibility of edible coatings as a Solution. It would be helpful to include a brief overview of the indicators reflecting film performance and indicators assessing the storage quality of subtropical fresh-cut fruits.
3. 3. The review provides an excellent overview of the preservation effects of edible films composed of different materials on fresh-cut subtropical fruits, but it lacks a comparative analysis of their mechanism of a
4. For section2.0Edible coatings, mechanism of action and applications in the food industry, it is suggested to use more visual aids, such as diagrams or flowcharts, to illustrate the preservation mechanism of edible coatings on fresh-cut subtropical fruits.
5. Table 1 and Table 2: There are two instances in the Coating formulationsection where "polysaccharides and proteins" are mentioned. These should be specified in detail, indicating the exact types of polysaccharides and proteins used.
6. It is recommended to use a diagram to provide a systematic summary of the entire review.

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

Thank you, dear reviewer.

We found your suggestions useful and have incorporated them into the manuscript. We appreciate the time you took to review and provide suggestions for improving this manuscript.

 Sentences that have been added or modified in the article based on your suggestions are highlighted in green.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall, the manuscript provides a comprehensive overview of the various edible coatings that can extend the shelf life and enhance the quality of subtropical fresh-cut fruits. The review is well-structured and includes a detailed discussion of the recent advancements in coating preservation technologies for various subtropical fresh-cut fruits. The review covers a wide range of topics related to application of edible coatings, but some sections may benefit from more in-depth analysis and discussion.

Here are some specific comments and suggestions that may help improve the manuscript:

1. Keywords: The initial letter is not capitalized. Line 40.
2. Introduction: The introduction section effectively sets the stage for the review by discussing the challenges in the storage of fresh-cut subtropical fruits and the feasibility of edible coatings as a Solution. It would be helpful to include a brief overview of the indicators reflecting film performance and indicators assessing the storage quality of subtropical fresh-cut fruits. Line 80-145.

1. 3. The review provides an excellent overview of the preservation effects of edible films composed of different materials on fresh-cut subtropical fruits, but it lacks a comparative analysis of their mechanism of a. Corrected. Line 222-301.
2. For section2.0Edible coatings, mechanism of action and applications in the food industry, it is suggested to use more visual aids, such as diagrams or flowcharts, to illustrate the preservation mechanism of edible coatings on fresh-cut subtropical fruits. Diagram added (Figure 2)
3. Table 1 and Table 2: There are two instances in the Coating formulationsection where "polysaccharides and proteins" are mentioned. These should be specified in detail, indicating the exact types of polysaccharides and proteins used. Corrected. Table 1 and Table 2
4. It is recommended to use a diagram to provide a systematic summary of the entire review. Diagram added (Figure 1 & 2).

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thank the authors for the attention given to the suggestions made, only, it is recommended to revise the whole manuscript, specifically to give order and coherence to the part of the introduction. Check that the information added is in the correct place; following a coherence with the manuscript. Finally, it is suggested to revise the citations throughout the manuscript, following the guidelines of the journal.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear editor,

We found the suggestions and comments of the reviewers encouraging and helpful. We welcome all suggestions to improve our manuscript.

We are very grateful for the time you have spent helping us improve our manuscript.

The manuscript “Edible Coatings to Prolong the Shelf Life and Improve the Quality of Subtropical Fresh/Fresh-Cut Fruits: A Review.” presents relevant and substantiated information showing Coatings to Prolong the Shelf Life and Improve the Quality of Subtropical. The authors addressed the suggested observations; however, some details remain.

Introduction

Line 42. The information corresponding to the entire introduction is adequate; however, it is recommended to the authors to adjust all the information and to have an order, especially in the problematic part.

Paragraphs are arranged.

Line 80-93: the authors are thanked for incorporating suggested information (relevant background; examples of coatings on some subtropical fruits); only verify that this information is in the correct order within the introduction.

The order of writing the article was revised according to the reviewer's suggestion. Parts of the introduction that were added in the previous version are presented in the current version under the title of topic 2 (2. Important quality factors of fresh-cut fruits). Lines 80 to 93 in the previous version were moved to lines 156 to 169.

Finally, justify why the ten fruits described in the manuscript were selected.

Content.

Thanks to the reviewer. The ten fruits presented in this manuscript are among the most valuable subtropical fruits in terms of nutritional value, medicinal value and importance. Furthermore, the number of commercial tropical and subtropical fruits is large and discussing them all would not fit in one article. In the future, we will consider other important tropical fruits and application of edible coatings in a review paper. However, as suggested by the reviewer, the reason for choosing these fruits was mentioned in general in Topic 4, before discussing the fruits. Lines 295 to 311.

Line 94-145: it is recommended that the authors previously attach information on the factors that induce fruit loss; loss of moisture, CO2, ethylene, etc. The authors made the suggested observations; however, it is recommended that the lines attached to the introduction be eliminated and that it be included in the content section, at the beginning of subtopic 2 or as an additional subtopic, prior to topic 2.

As recommended by the manuscript reviewer, the factors causing fruit loss were explained in the text. Lines 128 to 144.

Also, Topic 2 (Important quality factors of fresh-cut fruits) was added to the text and the paragraphs of each section (Introductory Topic and Topic 2) were adjusted according to its content.

421: the citation is repeated; delete Naveed et al. or (Naveed et al., 2024a). These two references were removed from the article entirely.

537: revise citation style: et al. 2024a) and (Naveed et al. 2024b); “,” is missing. These two references were removed from the article entirely.

526: Please review in detail the style of citations, following the guidelines of the journal; Seifi and Bekran (2024); “and or &”. The text of the article was corrected. Line 543

It is recommended to revise the whole manuscript, specifically to give order and coherence to the introduction part. Check that the added information is in the correct place; following a coherence with the manuscript. It is also suggested to review the citations throughout the manuscript. Thanks, checked and corrected.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf