Next Article in Journal
Assessment of the Nutritional Status and Quality of Life in Chronic Kidney Disease and Kidney Transplant Patients: A Comparative Analysis
Next Article in Special Issue
Addiction-like Eating in Chinese Adults: An Assessment Tool and Its Associations with Modern Eating-Related Habits
Previous Article in Journal
J-Shaped Association of Tomato Intake with New-Onset Hypertension in General Adults: A Nationwide Prospective Cohort Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Comparison of Emotional Triggers for Eating in Men and Women with Obesity
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nutrients
Volume 14
Issue 22
10.3390/nu14224815
Review Report
nutrients-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

The Complex of Phycobiliproteins, Fucoxanthin, and Krill Oil Ameliorates Obesity through Modulation of Lipid Metabolism and Antioxidants in Obese Rats

Nutrients 2022, 14(22), 4815; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14224815
by Xi Qiang 1,2,3, Chuanlong Guo 4, Wenhui Gu 1,5, Yuling Song 1, Yuhong Zhang 6, Xiangzhong Gong 2, Lijun Wang 1,3,5,* and Guangce Wang 1,5,*
Reviewer 1:
Nathaniel Vacanti
Reviewer 2:
Maria Angels Calvo
Nutrients 2022, 14(22), 4815; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14224815
Submission received: 6 October 2022 / Revised: 5 November 2022 / Accepted: 10 November 2022 / Published: 14 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrients, Foods, Dietary Patterns and Obesity)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors study the impact of supplementation of phycobiliproteins, fucoxanthin and krill oil (PFK) on the adverse effects of a high fat diet. They find PFK can correct adverse affects on body composition, lipid profiles, oxidative damage, and organ histology.

Major comments:

Figure 2B: Why is p reported to be <0.05 between HFD and PFK-M groups when they are nearly identical in adiposity index? Also, why would there be no effect in the PFK-M group when PFK-H and PFK-L are both impacted?

Table1: What is "modeling"?

Line 217: "Furthermore, the other index were decreased in the remaining 217 groups compared with HFD group, the decrease was not significant."
The statement is misleading. One cannot say two measurements are different if that difference is not found to be significant by a statistical test. We use statistical tests to determine if measurements are different.

Tables 2-5 would be better visualized as time-course plots.

Line 247: "The Plasma atherogenic index, 247 Castelli’s risk index (CRI-I) and Castelli’s risk index (CRI-II) were decreased almost simi- 248 lar with ND group by feeding PFK complex, indicating that they may reduce the risk of 249 developing arterial stiffness."
This statement is not true. There are instances where the indices are elevated by PFK feeding. Also, some of the indices where there is a reduction due to PFK feeding, the levels are closer to those of HFD than ND.

Section 3.4: In the discussion of dietary supplements impacting protein expression, the authors should site Jeong and Vacanti, Nutrition and Metabolism 2020 "Systemic vitamin intake impacting tissue proteomes".

The authors should address why dose-dependent impacts of PFK were observed in the Conclusions section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper is correct and suitable for the publication

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop