Effect of Feed Texture and Dimensions, on Feed Waste Type and Feeding Efficiency in Juvenile Sagmariasus verreauxi

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study investigated the effects of feed texture and dimension on the feeding efficiency of juvenile lobster Sagmariasus verreauxi. The findings provide implication for lobster aquaculture by reducing feed waste and cost. 

Here are some specific comments: 

1. In the introduction, the importance of Sagmariasus verreauxi aquaculture should be further addressed. For instance, it would be great to provide information on the primary geographical locations of this particular industry and its annual production. This information would enhance the readers' understanding of the target species and the significance of this study. 

2. In materials and methods, the origin of the juvenile should be mentioned. Were they captured from the field? how and how long they were acclimated in the laboratory conditions, and what type of feed were provided to them before the feeding experiments?

3. The formula of feed should be mentioned in the M&M section.

4. The discussion section should be enhanced and expanded upon. While there is a limited amount of literature on the feeding behavior of lobster juveniles, the authors should consider incorporating more discussion about feeding studies involving other crustacean or even invertebrate species. This broader context would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the subject. 

5. Olfactory sensation is another crucial parameter that affects crustacean feeding. The aspect of feed odor attractiveness should be included in the discussion.

Author Response

Please see attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work presents interesting and applicable data in lobster production. The production of this species still requires a lot of knowledge about management and has excellent prospects for the future, as it is a highly profitable creation. The work contributes to reducing waste and increasing lobster production efficiency.

Material and methods

The authors did not add the composition of the diet (protein, lipids, minerals...) and ingredients. Have any additives been added to the feed? Add to manuscript.

Results.

The r2 of the graphs are very low (less than 0.60). Are these low r2 values reliable? Would it be better to do another type of analysis? Could the low r2 be due to data variation?

Conclusion

The authors need to answer in the conclusion: what is the ideal pellet size. It needs to respond to the objective of the work.

Author Response

Please see attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall the manuscript appears original and very well written. It was enjoyable and in my opinion highly applicable to industry development.

One of my major criticisms is that (in my opinion) treatments should have been described adequately within the first paragraph of the materials and given an adequate acronym. Otherwise it felt like I was trying to decipher the treatments throughout the materials and methods. 

My other major criticism is the cleaning of wastes after six hours (lines 149/150). Why six hours? Are you able to justify this?

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf