Effects of Dam and Sire Breeds on Lamb Carcass Quality and Composition in Pasture-Based Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Here are some suggestions for authors considerations, although the paper is very well written. 

Introduction:

Lines 35-46: Provide 1-2 sentences of context then state the problem/knowledge gap this study addresses.

Remove details about increasing world population, changes in the industry, consumer preferences, etc. Focus the intro on why you did this specific study.

Methods:

Lines 59-62: State number of animals but move details about breeds and groups to a table in results or supplementary info.

Lines 63-75: Remove procedural details, just state lambs were raised on pasture and supplemented with feed.

Lines 76-95: Remove specific dates and weights. State samples were collected at X time points for analysis.

Lines 96-101: Move details of ELISA assay to supplementary. State briefly samples were analyzed by ELISA.

Lines 104-118: Condense details of DXA, dissection and muscle excision. Focus on key aspects only.

Lines 119-137: Remove specifics on gas chromatography. Just state fatty acids were analyzed by GC.

Results:

Lines 147-190: Streamline growth data to focus on key findings only in paragraph form supported by 1 table or figure. Remove redundant details.

Lines 191-227: Summarize carcass data in paragraph form with key findings supported by 1 table/figure. Omit repetitive numbers.

Lines 228-254: Good concise presentation of DXA and fatty acid data.

Lines 255-288: Streamline fatty acid tables to present key findings only.

Discussion:

Lines 300-318: Provide 1-2 sentence context then discuss your major findings and why they are important.

Lines 319-352: This level of background detail is not needed. Relate findings directly back to study objectives/rationale.

 

Lines 353-390: Succinct interpretation of key findings.

Author Response

As per your suggestions, we have worked to streamline the text and highlight the major finding.

Lines 35-46: Provide 1-2 sentences of context then state the problem/knowledge gap this study addresses.

Remove details about increasing world population, changes in the industry, consumer preferences, etc. Focus the intro on why you did this specific study.

Changed

Methods:

Lines 59-62: State number of animals but move details about breeds and groups to a table in results or supplementary info.

Condensed

Lines 63-75: Remove procedural details, just state lambs were raised on pasture and supplemented with feed.

Removed details but we were required to add details on how animal weights were collected upon submission of this paper.

Lines 76-95: Remove specific dates and weights. State samples were collected at X time points for analysis.

Removed

Lines 96-101: Move details of ELISA assay to supplementary. State briefly samples were analyzed by ELISA.

Condensed

Lines 104-118: Condense details of DXA, dissection and muscle excision. Focus on key aspects only.

Condensed

Lines 119-137: Remove specifics on gas chromatography. Just state fatty acids were analyzed by GC.

Condensed

Results:

Lines 147-190: Streamline growth data to focus on key findings only in paragraph form supported by 1 table or figure. Remove redundant details.

Condensed

Lines 191-227: Summarize carcass data in paragraph form with key findings supported by 1 table/figure. Omit repetitive numbers.

Summarized

Lines 228-254: Good concise presentation of DXA and fatty acid data.

Condensed

Lines 255-288: Streamline fatty acid tables to present key findings only.

It is difficult to reduce fatty acids tables because most individual fatty acids differed and only showing a summary of fatty acids by type is not always indicative of the changes that occurs.

Discussion:

Lines 300-318: Provide 1-2 sentence context then discuss your major findings and why they are important.

Streamlined

Lines 319-352: This level of background detail is not needed. Relate findings directly back to study objectives/rationale.

Changes made

Lines 353-390: Succinct interpretation of key findings.

Condensed

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The methods and techniques used during the development of the research are appropriate to achieve the proposed objective. I only have one doubt left, regarding the determination of fatty acids in four primary cuts of the sheep carcass: in the material and methods section, the procedure for grouping the results in table # 6 is not described and it is not possible to identify which racial subgroup they correspond to. The results shown in this table are general for the four muscles. I consider that the title of that table should be modified.

Author Response

The interactions between muscle and sire/dam breed were non-significant. Therefore, we presented the effects sire and dam breed across muscle in Table 5 and differences in individual muscles across breed types in Table 6.

Table titles were updated and a footnote denotes lack of interaction.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is well-written with sound scientific backing. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are some grammatical errors that need to be fixed

Author Response

We corrected grammatical errors in the manuscript.