Systematic Evidence Mapping to Assess the Sustainability of Bioplastics Derived from Food Waste: Do We Know Enough?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see detailed responses to all comments in the Rebuttal attached. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

thank you for the opportunity to review this article. Academic research should be replicable, robust, and follow best practices. A standard guideline must be followed, something we did not find in this work. First, the abstract doesn`t provide an accessible summary of the paper. The methodology is not cited in the abstract. Second, the paper has an inappropriate length, too long, that looks more like a report. The aims and contributions of this paper were not clear. There was no real discussion about the results found. Third, the conclusion must be composed of a few paragraphs that summarize the research question addressed, and the aims and contribution of the work. We found a poor conclusion that didn`t reflect the aims of the work. 

I recommend the rejection of this paper.

Author Response

Please see detailed responses to all comments in the Rebuttal Table attached. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

 

This study is very interesting and well written and compiled. The content flow is smooth and easy to read. The experiments were executed in a well-designed manner with experimental controls. The aim and objectives of the study are well addressed.

Author Response

Please see detailed responses to all comments in the Rebuttal Table attached. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

In my opinion the article needs major improvements.

Some examples of improvements are presented below:

-          The objective of the work is not clear

-          I suggest to improve the Figures and the Tables.  

-          spaces between words: I suggest checking the entire article, looking at the spaces between words

-          Please prepare the name of the figures according to the requirements of the journal.

-          Please present the bibliographic references in the text according to the journal's requirements.

-          Please check the punctuation throughout the article.

-          Please prepare the name of the tables according to the requirements of the journal.

-          Please arrange the entire article according to the journal's requirements.

-          References should be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the journal! https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/instructions

Author Response

Please see detailed responses to all comments in the Rebuttal Table attached. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

sincerely, i didn `t find a reals results in the conclusion, what is your contribution? 

At the end of the intrduction, you should detail the organization of the following sections.

Author Response

 Thank you once again for your constructive comments. Please find a detailed response to the attached rebuttal. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

In my opinion, the article should be published.

However, relate to:

-          Please arrange the (justify) text. There are areas with unaligned justify text.

-          Please add the point at end of the Figure 2 title.

-          Please explain the acronym COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand)  COD/l - CODžL⁻¹

-          In the Table 2, the presentation of some words (like: Consideration, Dimension, Lifecycl, transportation) is not appropriate.

-          Please explain the acronym P3HB - Poly(3-hydroxybutyrate)

-          Please check the spaces between words

Author Response

Thank you for your helpful comments. Please find the responses to comment on the rebuttal attached. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx