Selection of a Complex of Informative Features for Assessing the Internal Characteristics of Eggs for Consumption

Comments 1. Introduction. Please provide a strong reason why this study is essential. Could you put it before stating the objective of the study?

Response 1:

Thank you for this note.

The importance of this work is added at the end of the introduction part. (lines 87-97)

Comments 2. Line 90.  A total of 150 quail eggs from three producers were used. 150 chicken eggs from three 90 producers. Please replace it. We used 150 quail and 150 chicken eggs from three producers.

Response 2:

Corrected according to the reviewer note.

Comments 3. Line 91. Provide a GPS location for the city of Yambol, Bulgaria. Put the GPS location for the three producers (M1, M2, and M3).

Response 3:

Thank you for this note.

The GPS coordinates, according to WGS84 system were added. (Lines 102-105)

Comments 4. Line 92. They were stored at a temperature of 10±2 ^oC and a relative humidity of 70±3 92 %RH. In the chamber? Please give more detailed information on how to store the samples.

Response 4:

Thank you for this note.

The description of storage conditions was improved. (Lines 113-119)

Comments 5. Please use point (.) as a decimal symbol in all equations (1 to 44).

Response 5:

Corrected according to the reviewer note.

Comments 6. I strongly suggest the authors display the equations in one table and complete the table with feature names, formulas, and definitions (equations 1 to 44).

Response 6:

Thank you for this note.

The description of all used features is added in “Abbreviations” section, after the conclusion part.

Comments 7. Please be consistent in using P<0.05. Avoid to use P<0,05.

Response 7:

Corrected according to the reviewer note.

Comments 8. Please discuss the meaning of a strong peak at around 520 nm in Figures 2 to 7. Is it related to some important chemical compound in eggs?

Response 8:

Thank you for this note.

The spectral analysis of egg components has a strong peak at approximately 520 nm, showing the high amount of pigments, especially carotenoids and xanthophylls.

This text and cited literature source were added in the discussion part. (Lines 780-786)

Comments 9. How do you select features in Tables 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19? What are the criteria?

Response 9:

Thank you for this note.

The criteria are that the weight coefficients, calculated by RReliefF, FSRNCA and SFCPP methods have to be above 0.6 (w>0.6).

It was noted in the Material and methods part, with cited literature source. (lines 218-219)

Comments 1. The manuscript Selection of a complex of informative features for assessing the internal characteristics of eggs for consumption is really interesting and usefull for egg production system, especially considering the no products destruide.

Response 1:

Thank you for this note.

Comments 2. It's a good idea, but must to be improved by collecting and testing more samples in different conditions.

Response 2:

Thank you for this note.

Although this work has given useful data into tracking internal egg characteristics during storage, we acknowledge that further validation is needed. Further research is thus recommended with an increased sample size to enhance the statistical robustness and ensure wider applicability. Furthermore, testing under varied storage conditions, such as at different temperatures, humidity levels, and environmental factors, will give a chance to assess the adaptability of the proposed methods. Increasing the study to include different systems of egg production, seasonal changes, and geographic diversity will further strengthen the reliability of the findings.

This description is added in Discussion part. (Lines 796-808)

Comments 3. As suggestion, I recommend to put some tables as supplementary material to make the text more fluid.

Response 3:

Thank you for this note.

The raw data tables are above 40 pages for one table. We will present them on request from the readers. This description was added in the Data Availability Statement section.

“Data Availability Statement: Data will be available on request to the corresponding author. Also, we can present raw data tables on request.”

Comments 4. Adictionally, I recomend to discuss your results deeply.

Response 4:

Thank you for this note.

The Discussion part is extended.

Comments 1. The number of eggs used for measurement is too small. In this study, a total of 150 eggs from three producers were used. For every producer, there were 50 eggs. Meanwhile, the egg quality were measured at 6 time points, which means there were less than 8 eggs at each determining time.

Response 1:

Thank you for this note.

Although this work has given useful data into tracking internal egg characteristics during storage, we acknowledge that further validation is needed. Further research is thus recommended with an increased sample size to enhance the statistical robustness and ensure wider applicability. Furthermore, testing under varied storage conditions, such as at different temperatures, humidity levels, and environmental factors, will give a chance to assess the adaptability of the proposed methods. Increasing the study to include different systems of egg production, seasonal changes, and geographic diversity will further strengthen the reliability of the findings.

This description is added in Discussion part. (Lines 796-808)

Comments 2. What's the principle for selecting the three producers?

Response 2:

Thank you for this note.

The three producers were selected based on differences in farming practices, production scale, and geographical location to ensure variability in egg characteristics and assess the robustness of the proposed methods across diverse conditions.

This description was added in Material and methods part. (Lines 106-108)

Comments 3. The information about the breed of hen, rearing conditions, and age of hens should be provided.

Response 3:

Thank you for this note.

We don’t have full information about the breed of hen, rearing conditions, and age of hens.

The description what have to be done is added in the Discussion part. As mentioned in the answer of Comment 1.

Comments 4. It is mentioned that the eggs were purchased from the commercial network. What's the exact production date of the eggs? Have the eggs produced in the same date?

Response 4:

Thank you for this note.

The difference in the production date is 1-2 days. According to the packaging label. The shelf life of the eggs is 28 days, also according to the packaging label.

This description is added in Material and methods part. (Lines 109-110)

Comments 5. In this study, the eggs from three producers were analyzed separately. What's the result for the mixed samples?

Response 5:

Thank you for this note.

The analysis reveals that the informativeness of the examined features varies across producers, making it difficult to generalize the results. Future stages of the study, focusing on predicting storage duration and egg composition, will include additional analyses. However, the current findings indicate that a universal generalization across all producers is challenging.

This description is added in the discussion part. (Lines 804-808)

Comments 1. The authors replied all the requested comments.

Response 1:

Thank you for this note.

Comments 1. The number of eggs used at each time point should be provided.

Response 1:

Thank you for this note.

The full report of number of measurements is presented in newly added Table 1 (Lines 114-121).

Here is the description:

The presented data are for the number of hen and quail eggs measured at six time points (days 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25) from three manufacturers (M1, M2, and M3). The manufac-turers delivered 25 eggs/day/point of measurement or a total of 150 eggs per manufacturer per type of egg. The quantity of hen eggs and quail eggs measured was 450 of each; there-fore, that equated to 900 eggs. The measurements are in a controlled experiment whereby eggs were measured against time under consistent conditions.