Oil Press-Cakes and Meals Valorization through Circular Economy Approaches: A Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript entitled " Possibilities of valorization of oil press-cakes and meals" described very well. However, authors need to focus the reviewers' comments for improving the article through minor revisions
1) Authors may include a word " Review" in the title
2) Include some maximum utilizing or notable countries with some references in "Oilseeds are seeds used in most countries" section.
3) Correct the language errors in 3. Oilcakes. Phsyochemical properties
4) Correct the language errors in 5.1.1. Protein. Protein isolate, concentrate and hidrolysate and also need to combine the small paragraphs.
5) Please clearly mention the significant points on current disposal/management methods drawbacks
6) Authors may include "Challenges and Future Perspectives" section
7) Include some more significant points in the conclusion section in one paragraph
Author Response
Dear Editor,
We would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for the proper suggestions. We hope that we provided all the answers to the reviewers’ comments.
Thank you very much for taking into account to publish our manuscript entitled "Oil press-cakes and meals valorization through circular economy approaches: a review" (Ms. ID applsci-959104) in the special issue Recent Advances in Cereals, Legumes and Oilseeds grain products rheology and quality.
The present version of the paper has been revised according to the reviewers and editor suggestions. For this purpose, Track Changes function has been used. All the modifications are marked with red color.
Also, we attach the response to reviewers.
R1 Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Reviewer: Authors may include a word “Review” in the titleResponse: First of all, we would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for all the given comments suitable for improving the manuscript. The word “Review” was added according to referee suggestions. Reviewer: Include some maximum utilizing or notable countries with some references in “Oilseed are seeds used in most countries”Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his remarks. We include some countries according to referee suggestions. Reviewer: Correct the language errors in 3. Oilcakes. Phsycochemical propertiesResponse: We would like to thank to the referee for the close reading and for all the given comments suitable for improving the manuscript. We really appreciate your suggestions in order to make a better manuscript from the scientific point of view.We improved English language. Reviewer: Correct the language errors in 5.1.1. Protein. Protein isolate, concentrate and hydrolysate and also need to combine the small paragraphs
Response: We corrected, rewrote and removed some words and sentences from the paragraph according to the reviewer suggestion and we improved English language. Also, we combined the small paragraphs.
Reviewer: Please clearly mention the significant points on current disposal/management methods drawbacks
Response: We added a paragraph in the beginning of section “5. Possible ways to capitalize by-products obtained from oil industry”, where we presented the drawbacks of the current disposal methods.
Reviewer: Authors may include “Challenges and Future Perspectives” section
Response: We would like to thank the referee for the suggestion. We included a new section according to referee suggestion.
Reviewer: Include some more significant points in the conclusion section in one paragraph
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for the suggestion which have helped to modified the improved the conclusion.
Date Sent:
13.10.2020
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript applsci-959104 titled Possibilities of valorization of oil press-cakes and meals is very interesting and easy to read with an appropriate background to settle the relevance of the study. However, some modifications are need before to publication.
Major comments.
- I wold suggest change a title for example “Oil press-cakes and meals valorisation through circular economy approaches”
- In my opinion the introduction should be integrated with the circular economy principles in term of European regulations and in tenet of sustainable transformation process considering the five step of production process (eco-planning, modularity and versatility, energy efficiency, systemic approaches and by products recycle/reuse). In addition a general state of art of Oilseed by product generation and current disposal should be reported to define the aim of the review.
- I suggest to change the title of paragraph 2 “oilseed general aspects”; 3 “oilseed production process and products physiochemical properties
- I would suggest to revise the paragraph 5.1 “Extraction of bioactive compounds” emphasize the green extraction techniques respect to traditional extraction process (organic solvent) because are a part of green chemistry that strongly contribute with circular economy models development.
- In my opinion in the section 5.2 the author should be add the possibility to reuse the residual substrate of the different process reported (e.i. enzyme, antibiotics, etc.) as a new raw materials in other process or better link with other section. In my opinion the energy production such as Bio-fuel or landfill should be considered as a last resort to maximize all material potential.
- Regarding the possible use of by product as a food ingredient should be considered not only the consumer acceptability but also the rheological properties of novel foods. I suggest to add briefly the effects of by product integration on this parameter.
Minor suggestions.
Line 265 define if the solvents are organic or food grade (i.e. ethanol)
Author Response
Dear Editor,
We would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for the proper suggestions. We hope that we provided all the answers to the reviewers’ comments.
Thank you very much for taking into account to publish our manuscript entitled "Oil press-cakes and meals valorization through circular economy approaches: a review" (Ms. ID applsci-959104) in the special issue Recent Advances in Cereals, Legumes and Oilseeds grain products rheology and quality.
The present version of the paper has been revised according to the reviewers and editor suggestions. For this purpose, Track Changes function has been used. All the modifications are marked with red color.
Also, we attach the response to reviewers.
We look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely yours, Sonia AMARIEI & Ancuța PETRARU
R2 Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Major comments: Reviewer: I would suggest change a title for example: “Oil press-cakes and meals valorisation through circular economy approaches”Response: First of all, we would like to thank the referee for the suggestion. The title was reformulated according to referee suggestions. Reviewer: In my opinion the introduction should be integrated with the circular economy principles in term of European regulations and in tenet of sustainable transformation process considering the five step of production process (eco-planning, modularity and versatility, energy efficiency, systemic approaches and by products recycle/reuse). In addition, a general state of art of Oilseed by product generation and current disposal should be reported to define the aim of the review.Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his remarks. We added in the introduction sections information about the circular economy and the measured that need to be implies for its achievement. Also, we defined the aim of the review.
Reviewer: I suggest to change the title of paragraph 2 “oilseed general aspects”; 3 “oilseed production process and products physiochemical properties
Response: We would like to thank to the referee for the given comments suitable for improving the manuscript. We reformulated the title of the two paragraphs according to the suggestions.
Reviewer: I would suggest to revise the paragraph 5.1 “Extraction of bioactive compounds” emphasize the green extraction techniques respect to traditional extraction process (organic solvent) because are a part of green chemistry that strongly contribute with circular economy models development.
Response: We corrected the paragraph according to the reviewer suggestion.
Reviewer: In my opinion in the section 5.2 the author should be add the possibility to reuse the residual substrate of the different process reported (e.i. enzyme, antibiotics, etc.) as a new raw materials in other process or better link with other section. In my opinion the energy production such as Bio-fuel or landfill should be considered as a last resort to maximize all material potential.
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for the close reading and for all the given comments suitable for improving the manuscript. We really appreciate your suggestions in order to make a better manuscript from the scientific point of view.
The whole section was correct so that it is better linked with the other sections We highlight the advantages of using the new disposal methods over the current ones. Also, we moved the section “Landfill and Bio-fuel production” at the end with the hope that this two will be used as last resources.
Reviewer: Regarding the possible use of by product as a food ingredient should be considered not only the consumer acceptability but also the rheological properties of novel foods. I suggest to add briefly the effects of by product integration on this parameter.Response: We would like to thank the referee for the suggestion. We included some information regarding the rheological properties of novel food. However limited studies were made about this subject.
Minor suggestion: Reviewer: Line 265 define if the solvents are organic or food grade (i.e. ethanol)
Response: We defined the nature of the solvent according to the review observation.
Date Sent:
13.10.2020
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
General overview.
The authors have revised the manuscript according to the suggestions. This work is relevant, interesting, and qualified to be accepted for publishing in Sustainability journal. However, there are still a few issues that need to be corrected.
Minor suggestions.
Line 36 In my opinion the energy production should be considered as a last resort to maximize all material potential because generate the CO2. I suggest to move “conversion in energy, introduction in human food, livestock and fish feedstuff, production of fertilizers and compost (generated from the aerobic decomposition of organic matter by microorganisms and insects” after “Another alternative is extracting the maximum value from wastes and by-products. The last ones contain high amounts of bioactive compounds (carbohydrates, lipids, organic acids, proteins, vitamins, minerals and antioxidants) with numerous health benefits (anti-tumoral, viral, bacterial and mutagenic abilities) that can be isolated and employed in foods, pharmaceutics, cosmetics and textiles. Achieving this can be a challenge but at the same time could add more value to food, reduce disposal costs and risks caused by residues [6]. In addition after bioactive extraction the by product obtained could be used for conversion in energy, introduction in human food, livestock and fish feedstuff, production of fertilizers and compost.
Line 37 delete or close the bracket
Line 37 the reference 9 was duplicate in bracket [9,9]. I think the second must be eliminated
Line 99 I suggest to use the full name of USDA the first time. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)
Line 115, 251, 299, 409, 437,471, 480, 482, 525, 555, 568, 656, Usually when report the reference in this form the year is not put. Delete
Line 274, 309, 328, 371, 404, 502, 589, 592, 605, 619, 625, 662, 712, 727, 738, 789, References lack the number and delete the year
Line 302 is not clear if 12 h or 120 h
Line 324 70 â—¦C change in 70° C
Line 436 check the number in the bracket
Author Response
Dear Editor,
We would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for the proper suggestions. We hope that we provided all the answers to the reviewer’ comments.
Thank you very much for taking into account to publish our manuscript entitled "Oil press-cakes and meals valorization through circular economy approaches: a review" (Ms. ID applsci-959104) in the special issue Recent Advances in Cereals, Legumes and Oilseeds grain products rheology and quality.
The present version of the paper has been revised according to the reviewers and editor suggestions. For this purpose, Track Changes function has been used. All the modifications are marked with red color.
We uploaded the corrected version of the article ID foods-800499 according to
reviewers and editor suggestions. Also, we attach the response to reviewers.
We look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely yours, Sonia AMARIEI & Ancuța PETRARU
R2 Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors have revised the manuscript according to the suggestions. This work is relevant, interesting, and qualified to be accepted for publishing in Sustainability journal. However, there are still a few issues that need to be corrected.
We would like to thank the referee for his appreciations.
Reviewer: Line 36 In my opinion the energy production should be considered as a last resort to maximize all material potential because generate the CO2. I suggest to move “conversion in energy, introduction in human food, livestock and fish feedstuff, production of fertilizers and compost (generated from the aerobic decomposition of organic matter by microorganisms and insects” after “Another alternative is extracting the maximum value from wastes and by-products. The last ones contain high amounts of bioactive compounds (carbohydrates, lipids, organic acids, proteins, vitamins, minerals and antioxidants) with numerous health benefits (anti-tumoral, viral, bacterial and mutagenic abilities) that can be isolated and employed in foods, pharmaceutics, cosmetics and textiles. Achieving this can be a challenge but at the same time could add more value to food, reduce disposal costs and risks caused by residues [6]. In addition after bioactive extraction the by product obtained could be used for conversion in energy, introduction in human food, livestock and fish feedstuff, production of fertilizers and compost.
Response: We really appreciate your suggestion. We removed the sentences, according to the referee suggestion.
Reviewer: Line 37 delete or close the bracket
Response: First of all, we would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for all the given comments suitable for improving the manuscript. We close the bracket.
Reviewer: Line 37 the reference 9 was duplicate in bracket [9,9]. I think the second must be eliminated.
Response: We really appreciate your suggestions in order to make a better manuscript. We corrected the bracket, according the referee suggestion, deleting the double 9 and adding the reference number 10.
Reviewer: Line 99 I suggest to use the full name of USDA the first time. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)
Response: We replaced “USDA” with “U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)”, according to the reviewer suggestion.
Reviewer: Line 115, 251, 299, 409, 437,471, 480, 482, 525, 555, 568, 656, Usually when report the reference in this form the year is not put. Delete
Response: We would like to thank the referee for the suggestions suitable for improving the manuscript. We deleted the years.
Reviewer: Line 274, 309, 328, 371, 404, 502, 589, 592, 605, 619, 625, 662, 712, 727, 738, 789, References lack the number and delete the year
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for the given suggestion. We introduced the number of reference and deleted the years.
Reviewer: Line 302 is not clear if 12 h or 120 h
Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for the close reading. We corrected the sentence “12o h” with “120 h”
Reviewer: Line 324 70 â—¦C change in 70 °C
Response: We corrected “70 â—¦C” with “70 °C”
Reviewer: Line 436 check the number in the bracket
Response: We removed three reference from the bracket so that the references number are better understood.
Date Sent:
17.10.2020
