Reduction of Pericarp Browning and Microbial Spoilage on Litchi Fruits in Modified Atmosphere Packaging

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reduction of pericarp browning and microbial spoilage on lichi fruits under modified atmosphere packaging

 

This manuscript is interesting and its content can help producers of packaged lichi to prolong the shelf life of this high value product for human health. I have only minor comments given in the following list.

 

-          Equation (2) and equation for x need to rearrange: renumber equation (2) on (2a) and equation below for x number as (2b). Do the gap between both equations.

-          Line 143 as I know the SI units for force is Newton.

-          Line 236: This sentence gives the impression that there will also be a parameter b* in Figure 2. But that is not true.

-          Lines 332 and 33 contain water loss 4.44 % and not significant differences 3.66 %. I cannot find these numbers in Table 2.

-          Line 361 there is need to use “organic acids” (there are there discussed).

-          Table 5 contains for Thiamin and storage day 9 extraordinary values. Please, correct them.

-          Line 508 this research was supported by no grant nor internal support? Who sponsored this work?

-          Reference list is not following guidance for authors. Some references have doi code and some references not. Please, do corrections as much as possible.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 
thank you very much for your helpful advice.
We have made the requested changes directly in the text.

R. Equation (2) and the equation for x must be reorganised: renumber equation (2) in (2a) and the underlying equation for the number x in (2b). Make the difference between the two equations.
A. Done.

R.  Line 143, I know that the SI unit of measurement for force is Newton.
A. Check.

R. Line 236: This sentence gives the impression that there is also a parameter b* in Figure 2. But this is not true.
A. Check.

R.  Lines 332 and 33 contain water losses of 4.44% and insignificant differences of 3.66%. I cannot find these numbers in Table 2.
A. Check.

R. In line 361 you need to use "organic acids" (it is mentioned).
A. Check. 

R. Line 508 this research was supported by no grant nor internal support? Who sponsored this work?
A. Dear Reviewer, due to an mistake was not entered. This research was supported by the TINFRUT project, as stated in the text. 

R. Reference list is not following guidance for authors. Some references have doi code and some references not. Please, do corrections as much as possible.
A. Done

Reviewer 2 Report

In this manuscript (horticulturae-2418533) entitled ‘Reduction of pericarp browning and microbial spoilage on lichi fruits under modified atmosphere packaging’ submitted to Horticulturae, Ilenia Tinebra and colleagues have applied different combinations of MAP based on the use of natural gases that are innocuous to human health and alternative to commercially adopted sulfur dioxide (SO2) treatment. Authors showed that MAP3 treatment was the most effective in preventing browning, loss of red pericarp color, vitamin content, and maintenance of acceptable SSC/TA and flavor. In addition, all MAP-treated lychee fruits did not harbor undesirable microorganisms during the entire cold storage period. Therefore, MAP3 conditions delayed pericarp browning, maintained better organoleptic quality of lychee fruits. Overall, I consider this research is interesting, but this present version is unsuitable for publication.

1, The data presented in the table 1, 2, 3, and 4 do not make sense. For instance, same value (including the SD value) appeared in different treatments.

2, For Figure 1, the error bar should be displayed in the revision.

3, For Figure 2, the ‘L*’ and ‘a*’ is confusing, please modify. In addition the legends for figure 2a and 2b should be provided in the revised manuscript.

4, The experiment design for the MAP1, MAP2 and MAP3 treatments should be explained in the revised section of result.

5. Full names of the abbreviations MAP, CA and R.H. should be spelt out at their first appearance in this article.

6. Please double-check the reference list. For instance, the full name but not abbreviations of journals are incorrectly presented.

Moderate editing of English language is required.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, thank you very much for your advice and for letting us notice the mistake we made. 

A. The data presented in the table 1, 2, 3, and 4 do not make sense. For instance, same value (including the SD value) appeared in different treatments.
A. Due to a write error the same values were copied in the tables. The error has been corrected and the new data has been included in the text.

R. For Figure 1, the error bar should be displayed in the revision.
A. Done

R. For Figure 2, the 'L*' and 'a*' is confusing, please modify. In addition the legends for figure 2a and 2b should be provided in the revised Manuscript.
A. Done.

R. The experiment design for the MAP1, MAP2 and MAP3 treatments should be explained in the revised section of result.
A. Done.

R. Full names of the abbreviations MAP, CA and R.H. should be spelt out at their first appearance in this article.
A. Done.

R. Please double-check the reference list. For instance, the full name but not abbreviations of journals are incorrectly presented.
a. Done.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have made  an all round investigation of using MAP packaging on fruit quality. The presentation and results are fine, some small adjustment are welcomed.

 

In Figure 1 SD as standard deviation is mentioned in the caption of image but there is none in the Results figure. 

In conclusion - C02 usage is emphasized but as all three MAP variations had the same concentrations- maybe and additional comment on the 02/N2 influence in fruit preservation would be also appropriate.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your suggestions, the requested changes have been made in the text.

R. In Figure 1, SD as standard deviation is mentioned in the image caption, but is not in the results figure.
A. Done.

R. In conclusion - the use of C02 is emphasised, but since all three MAP variants had the same concentrations, perhaps an additional comment on the influence of 02/N2 in fruit storage would be appropriate.
A. Done. 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have addressedmy concerns in the revision. This revised manuscript looks much improved.