Potentially Postbiotic-Containing Preservative to Extend the Use-By Date of Raw Chicken Sausages and Semifinished Chicken Products
, Rosa Helena Luchese 3, Ivonete Rossi Bautitz 1 and André Fioravante Guerra 4,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study investigated the use of potentially postbiotic preservatives (PPCP), pro-22 produced in a semi-cultured fermentation system from Lacticaseibicillus paracasei DTA 83 and Saccharo-23myces cerevisiae var. boulardii 17, in order to extend the shelf life of raw poultry sausage and semi-finished product 24 chicken products
The conclusions of the conducted research are clear and result from the obtained research results. The material used for the research is sufficient, the research methods have been selected appropriately. The arrangement of the figure and tabels is clear and presents the obtained results very well. Discussing the results against the background of other authors is very detailed. The publications cited by the authors of the article are well selected. For the most part, the authors refer to the latest knowledge published in renowned scientific journals. I could not find any mistakes in the scientific aspect of the manuscript.
However, the authors did not avoid a few mistakes, which I will list below:
- A few punctuation problems are present in the manuscript. I suggest the Authors to double-check the text.
-In the materials and methods section, please include information about the program used for statistical analysis
Author Response
Point 1: A few punctuation problems are present in the manuscript. I suggest the Authors to double-check the text.
Answer: The text was revised and corrected.
Point 2: In the materials and methods section, please include information about the program used for statistical analysis.
Answer: We have included the programs used for statistical analysis in the text (lines 449-450 and lines 462-467).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Reviewer(s)’ General Comments to Authors:
There are parts in the manuscript where English could be more improved. The statistical part could be more improved, explained a little better, information on some analyses is missing. This paper could be suitable for publication while some improvements should be improved or changed. Hence, it can be considered for publication. The reviewer has some minor comments as previously mentioned below before it can be published.
Specific comments:
Line 41, the introduction needs to be with more specific details about topic
Line 96, During Phase 2, PPCP has produced in a pilot-industrial
Line 98, The standard…
Line 99, …conditions to serve as a control…
Line 120, ...manufacturer's...
Line 279, maybe better rephrase... products in a pilot industrial scale.. with products ON a pilot industrial...
Line 287, Carcasses were trussed...
Line 332, ...counts of the initial microbial load...
Line 388/389, please clarify the statistical method in the text or figure legend
Line 392,...was eliminated FROM R1 due...
Line 392, ...insignificance of microbial growth...
Line 404, ...regression was estimated...
Line 428, ...other preservatives, such as biocides...
Line 435, ...below 0.5% was added...
Line 454, indicate instead of indicating...
Line 567, These results indicate that the positive effect...
Line 587, ...external aspects, such as climatic...
Author Response
Point 1: Line 41, the introduction needs to be with more specific details about topic
Answer: The section was entirely revised. We have included two paragraphs approaching specifically the topic in L42-49. Moreover, superfluous information was deleted.
Point 2: Line 96, During Phase 2, PPCP has produced in a pilot-industrial
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 3: Line 98, The standard…
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 4: Line 99, …conditions to serve as a control…
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 5: Line 120, ...manufacturer's...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 6: Line 279, maybe better rephrase... products in a pilot industrial scale.. with products ON a pilot industrial...
Answer: Thank you for your advice, we have rephrased accordingly.
Point 7: Line 287, Carcasses were trussed...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 8: Line 332, ...counts of the initial microbial load...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 9: Line 388/389, please clarify the statistical method in the text or figure legend
Answer: As also requested by reviewer #1, the programs used for statistical analysis were included in the text (lines 449-450 and lines 462-467) and the methods were inserted in the figure legends.
Point 10: Line 392,...was eliminated FROM R1 due...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 11: Line 392, ...insignificance of microbial growth...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 12: Line 404, ...regression was estimated...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 13: Line 428, ...other preservatives, such as biocides...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 14: Line 435, ...below 0.5% was added...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 15: Line 454, indicate instead of indicating...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 16: Line 567, These results indicate that the positive effect...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Point 17: Line 587, ...external aspects, such as climatic...
Answer: It was modified accordingly.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
