Packaging Weight, Filling Ratio and Filling Efficiency of Yogurt and Relevant Packagings Depending on Commercial Packaging Design, Material, Packaging Type and Filling Quantity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

Some moderate English changes are required for your manuscript (see lines: 68, 71, 83, 234, 345, 390, 536...).

In the meantime, in lines 109-110, it seems a disagreement appears between "a higher bottle size correlated with a better packaging efficiency" and "at high bottle sizes, packaging efficiency started to decrease"?!

Author Response

Dear respected reviewer,

thank you for you comments.

We addressed all remarks and ammended our manuscript.

Best regards

Sven Sängerlaub

Reviewer 2 Report

Extensive editing of English language and style required before any further comments can be made for this research. The expression should be more scientific. The current version is not well understood. 

For example:

Line 16  How the packaging is evaluated? Or delete this sentence.

Line 16  Readers may consider the “Used packaging” is recycled packaging, which has been used before. May change it to “commercial packaging”.

Line 17 the filling ratio of most packaging was above 70%

Line 18 PP, PS, PET, PE-HD is the first time to appear and need to provide the full name.

Line 19  different types of packaging

Line 19 What is the closures? The caps?

Line 21 per gram of packaging, provide the percentage is more appropriate

Line 22 I. E. ??

Line 24-25  can not understand

Author Response

Dear respected reviewer,

Thank you for you comments. We addressed all comments and ammended the manuscript-

"Line 21 per gram of packaging, provide the percentage is more appropriate". In this case we would like to keep our depiction.

Best regards

Sven Sängerlaub

Reviewer 3 Report

Abstract:

Line 13: To identify or to improve? Please be clear.

Line 14-15: Club the two sentences related to procurement of yogurt and evaluation of packagings.

Line 18-19: Please use full-form when the abbreviation is used for the first time. Otherwise, it is difficult to understand for a novice researcher.

Line 21-22: Rewrite.

Introduction:

1.       Line 32: Do not use short sentences in scientific writing. Please get it corrected by native English speaker.

2.       Line 37-38: Why PLA is discussed here? I could not find any mention of PLA in abstract. It is better to discuss PP, PE as packaging materials for yoghurts or fermented beverages.

Some relevant references are:

https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.70821

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/joss.12747

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029922000164

3.       Introduction should be re-written problem-solution specific.

4.       Line 82-86: No need of methods as the research is towards the market survey.

5.       Line 122-130: Hypothesis should be written in paragraph, not in bullet points.

6.       I believe introduction section should not have sub-headings.

Materials and Methods:

1.       Line 140: Sub-heading 2.2 should be sample processing rather than sample preparation.

2.       Line 190-195: Please do not write anything in bullet points in scientific article.

Results and Discussion

1.       Packaging and packing are two different words with different meanings. Please rectify in whole manuscript.

2.       English should be checked by native speaker.

3.       When the samples were eaten as mentioned in Materials and Methods, why sensory evaluation was not carried out? It could bring our significant impact of packaging material on the acceptance of the product.

Conclusion:

1.       Line 533: It is not an apt beginning line for the conclusion.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

thank you for the comments. We addressed most of the comments and ammended the document. We hope the reviewer agrees.

"Why PLA is discussed here?" PLA is discussed because it is discussed in industry community for yogurt and until recently was used for yogurt cups. From point of applied sciene we consider this information as relevant.

A reference was added.

Introduction (3., 4., 6.); Materials and Methods (2.): We kept our manuscript mostly. After deep discussions we found it tolerable as it is.

The English was checked.

We did no sensory trials because several kind of yogurt are found in one type of packaging that would extend our work too much.

Best regards

Sven Sängerlaub

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Agree to publish

Author Response

Thank you.

Reviewer 3 Report

It can be published in its current form

Author Response

Thank you.