Physiochemical Properties and Oxidation Status of Pork from Three Rearing Systems
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
General comments
In this study, there is a fatal error in the experimental design that is very fundamental. As shown in Table 1, each rearing system had a different breed. This was the decisive one. Different genotypes will respond differently to different environments. To be fair, the same genotype must be reared in different rearing systems before a conclusion can be drawn about whether the environment affects meat quality as expected.
English is fine, minor error for gramatic must be improved
Author Response
We are comparing the pig meats which are produced from 3 different production system (organic, traditional and conventional). Each production system is integrated system include its conditions such as age of animal at slaughter, feeding, welfare (space available to the animal) as well as suitable or preferable breed (strain) of animal for that rearing system. For example, the organic rearing system prefer to use indigenous breeds and strains, as its mentioned in Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008:
Origin of organic animals
- In the choice of breeds or strains, account shall be taken of the capacity of animals to adapt to local conditions, their vitality and their resistance to disease. In addition, breeds or strains of animals shall be selected to avoid specific diseases or health problems associated with some breeds or strains used in intensive production, such as porcine stress syndrome, PSE Syndrome (pale-soft-exudative), sudden death, spontaneous abortion and difficult births requiring caesarean operations. Preference is to be given to indigenous breeds and strains.
So using the same breed for different rearing system can be used for the research purpose but could not be practical, for an example the suitable breed for conventional production system is not maybe suitable for organic system.
We evaluate the pork as it is (not as can to be), we wanted to simulate the real situation. Such pork is available in the market and It is the consumer's right to know the quality of this meats and on this point our research was based.
Previously we published several works about the comparison of meat from different rearing systems of animals with different breeds such as in ducks and chicken in the following articles:
Abdullah, F.A.A., Buchtova, H and Jezek, F. The oxidation status of three types of duck meat (conventional, organic, wild) during refrigerated storage under air and vacuum-packaged atmospheres. British Poultry Science. 2022, 63, 528-534. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2022.2035674
Abdullah, F.A.A., Buchtová, H. Quantitative and qualitative properties of giblets from conventional, organic, and wild ducks. Acta Veterinaria Brno, 2022, 91 (1), 107-114. https://doi.org/10.2754/avb202291010107.
Abdullah, F. A. A., Buchtová, H. Quantity and quality properties of breast and thigh of chicken broilers from organic and conventional production systems. Journal of Food Safety and Food Quality - Archiv für Lebensmittelhygiene, 2017, vol. 68, no. 3, p. 53-80. DOI 10.2376/0003-925X-68-56. https://journal-food-safety.de/Article-Details/240
Abdullah, F.A.A., Buchtová, H. Comparison of qualitative and quantitative properties of the wings, necks and offal of chicken broilers from organic and conventional production systems. Veterinární medicína, 2016, vol. 61, no. 11, p. 643-651. doi: 10.17221/286/2015-VETMED. https://vetmed.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/vet-201611-0005_comparison-of-qualitative-and-quantitative-properties-of-the-wings-necks-and-offal-of-chicken-broilers-from-or.php
Comments on the Quality of English Language
English is fine, minor error for gramatic must be improved
It was revised
We are thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work.
With kind regards,
Reviewer 2 Report
This study is to evaluate the physicochemical properties and antioxidant activity of pork meat samples raised in three farming systems: Organic, conventional and traditional. The authors had conducted the test on physical and chemical parameters including colour, pH, dry matter, protein, collagen, fat and ash, and antioxidant activity. Some tests showed significant difference between the meat samples from the rearing system, while some parameters remain insignificant.
Abstract: Authors need to give a brief intro on the importance of determining the physicochemical properties and oxidation status, and explain organic, conventional and traditional.
Line 112: Authors need to elaborate more on the living condition of traditional pig farming. Current writing is brief and unclear.
Materials and Methods
2.1. Rearing conditions of animals and samples preparation: Authors need to specify the body parts of the samples. Different body parts samples will likely to have variation in the composition, i.e. total proteins, fats
Line 107-111: Conventional pig farming: Authors need to clearly describe the living conditions of pig reared under conventional farming.
Line 112-116: Traditional pig farming: Authors need to clearly describe the living conditions of pig reared under traditional farming.
Line 140: Authors need to explain how Determination of total protein is performed, and any calculation formula involved.
Line 255-256: "In contrast, Olsson and Pickova [32] reported that the meat from organically raised pigs was darker/lighter in color". This sentence is confusing.
Line 268-271: Authors described that the yellow colour of the meat is due to fat content. However, if different parts of body of the pig will have different fat composition. Authors need to explain on this.
Line 329-331: "The lower antioxidant capacity observed in meat from organic pigs in this study may be due to its involvement in controlling oxidation processes in the body, thus depleting its reserves in the meat." This explanation seems to be very vague. Authors need to repharase for clarity.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
Our reply to comments and suggestion of reviewer
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This study is to evaluate the physicochemical properties and antioxidant activity of pork meat samples raised in three farming systems: Organic, conventional and traditional. The authors had conducted the test on physical and chemical parameters including colour, pH, dry matter, protein, collagen, fat and ash, and antioxidant activity. Some tests showed significant difference between the meat samples from the rearing system, while some parameters remain insignificant.
Abstract: Authors need to give a brief intro on the importance of determining the physicochemical properties and oxidation status, and explain organic, conventional and traditional.
Added in Lines: 15-18.
Line 112: Authors need to elaborate more on the living condition of traditional pig farming. Current writing is brief and unclear.
We added slightly more information about it, but about conventional rearing conditions since there are not so strict, there are no certain requirements to be fulfilled.
Materials and Methods
2.1. Rearing conditions of animals and samples preparation: Authors need to specify the body parts of the samples. Different body parts samples will likely to have variation in the composition, i.e. total proteins, fats
Thank you for reviewer, that is true, for that we used the same body part which is M. biceps femoris (in line: 125-126)
Line 107-111: Conventional pig farming: Authors need to clearly describe the living conditions of pig reared under conventional farming.
We would like to thank reviewer about this comment and we agree completely we your opinion about lack description of living conditions of traditional and conventional rearing systems as well as information about feeding composition. Unfortunately, the breeders inform us only partially information (which is reported in manuscript) and they are not ready to give us more details (could be due to business secrets). We indicated about this matter in conclusion (lines: 386-394).
Related to the aforementioned point it is necessary to explain for reviewer that: We evaluate the pork as it is, we wanted to simulate the real situation. Such pork is available in the market and It is the consumer's right to know the quality of this meats, thus this research is directed primarily at the consumer
Note: We added slightly more information about it, but about conventional rearing conditions since there are not so strict, there are no certain requirements to be fulfilled.
Line 112-116: Traditional pig farming: Authors need to clearly describe the living conditions of pig reared under traditional farming.
Same as our previous reply (for conventional pig farming)
Line 140: Authors need to explain how Determination of total protein is performed, and any calculation formula involved.
Added in lines 147-153
Line 255-256: "In contrast, Olsson and Pickova [32] reported that the meat from organically raised pigs was darker/lighter in color". This sentence is confusing.
We would like to express our thank to reviewer for attention us about this mistake, it is corrected to: darker/redder in color. (line:275)
Line 268-271: Authors described that the yellow colour of the meat is due to fat content. However, if different parts of body of the pig will have different fat composition. Authors need to explain on this.
‘’Different parts of body of the pig will have different fat composition’’ this is true, but we comparing the same part of pig body which is M. biceps femoris
Line 329-331: "The lower antioxidant capacity observed in meat from organic pigs in this study may be due to its involvement in controlling oxidation processes in the body, thus depleting its reserves in the meat." This explanation seems to be very vague. Authors need to repharase for clarity.
It was revised (lines: 364-366).
We are thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work.
With kind regards,
Reviewer 3 Report
Add results in increase or decrease percentage of your study in abstract
Line 41-49: Please make it short.
Line 93, 107, 112: please do not under line and mention as it.
Please improve discussion
Also improve conclusion part.
English editing is neeeded
Author Response
Reviewer 3
Our reply to comments and suggestion of reviewer
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Add results in increase or decrease percentage of your study in abstract
Added in lines: 29:33
Line 41-49: Please make it short.
It was revised.
Line 93, 107, 112: please do not under line and mention as it.
Corrected.
Please improve discussion
We would like to express our thank to reviewer, thanks to him, the discussion of manuscript enriched and improved. We tried to revised it by adding the new text sub-paragraph of discussion in lines:
257-261,
276-280,
282-284,
314-317,
357-366.
Also improve conclusion part.
We would like to express our thank to reviewer, thanks to him, the conclusion paragraph improved. We tried to revised it by adding the new text in lines:
374-378,
384-394.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
English editing is needed
It was revised
We are thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work.
With kind regards,
Reviewer 4 Report
The objective of the research was to assess how various rearing systems influence the physicochemical properties and oxidation states of pork meat. The study involved obtaining meat samples from three distinct pig rearing systems: organic, conventional, and traditional. Before publication, the following comments should be considered:
Comment Abstract: Please give the background of the work before objective.
Comment Lines 25-27: Please rewrite the sentence. It is unclear.
Comment Lines 127-128: Chroma saturation and hue angle could be measured directly. Therefore, please write the equations that used.
Comment Lines 175-178: Please write the equation in scientific form.
Comment Lines 180-183: Give more detail about statistical analysis. How did you decide to use parametric or non-parametric test? What was the replication for your experiments?
Comment Lines 185: Before presenting the sub-results, it is important to provide a few general result sentences to provide an overview of the findings.
Comment Tables 2-4: Please erase the right column. It is not necessary. It is enough to write a* and h° values in table 2 with superscript “a”.
Comment Lines 213, 222, 223, 229: typo
Comment Lines 345-349: Please rewrite the sentence. It is unclear.
Moderate editing of English language required.
Author Response
Reviewer 4
Our reply to comments and suggestion of reviewer
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The objective of the research was to assess how various rearing systems influence the physicochemical properties and oxidation states of pork meat. The study involved obtaining meat samples from three distinct pig rearing systems: organic, conventional, and traditional. Before publication, the following comments should be considered:
Comment Abstract: Please give the background of the work before objective.
Added in Lines: 15-18
Comment Lines 25-27: Please rewrite the sentence. It is unclear.
It was rewritten.
Comment Lines 127-128: Chroma saturation and hue angle could be measured directly. Therefore, please write the equations that used.
It was added. (line: 135)
Comment Lines 175-178: Please write the equation in scientific form.
It was done. (line: 186)
Comment Lines 180-183: Give more detail about statistical analysis. How did you decide to use parametric or non-parametric test? What was the replication for your experiments?
The explanation was added. (lines: 190-193)
Comment Lines 185: Before presenting the sub-results, it is important to provide a few general result sentences to provide an overview of the findings.
It was added. (196-200)
Comment Tables 2-4: Please erase the right column. It is not necessary. It is enough to write a* and h° values in table 2 with superscript “a”.
It was deleted and now it is possible to see significant difference between rows according to different superscript.
Comment Lines 213, 222, 223, 229: typo
It was revised.
Comment Lines 345-349: Please rewrite the sentence. It is unclear.
It was revised.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Moderate editing of English language required.
It was revised
We are thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work.
With kind regards,
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I am still cant accept the comparison of 3 breed, for sure it will give different respon in different environment, then it is not comparable.
fine
Author Response
Response to reviewer
Dear reviewer, in our work we compare 3 whole production systems, not comparing only breeds or rearing environments (such as housing conditions and access to outdoor). In other words, we compare product (meat) of 3 producers, each one of them can be represented as example of rearing system. Each production system has its conditions including a suitable breed of animal. Organic (according to the EU legislation: Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008) and free range system prefer to used slow-growing indigenous breed, whereas conventional system required to used fast-growing commercial breed.
In our work, the same local breed (Prestice Black-Pie) of pig are used for both organic and traditional systems, and commercial breed (Czech Improved White Pigs) used for conventional system, so there are two breeds not three.
Traditional breed is presumed to have characteristics that make it well adapted to lower input, free range and organic systems. Traditional breeds may be less prolific, grow slowly and have excess carcass fat at heavy slaughter weights.
Conventional breeds or specialized genetic lines have high prolificacy, efficient feed conversion, high growth rates and carcass leanness. These breeds are selected in conventional, confined environments and therefore may not be sufficiently adapted to a production environment that is characterized by more space and freedom of movement for the animals, use of diets with more fibrous feedstuffs and lower protein quality, restricted use of antibiotics and a higher influence of (possibly adverse) weather conditions (Nevrkla et al., 2021; Leenhouwers and Merks, 2013).
Rearing breed of conventional system (fast-growing) under organic system was research by several authors also in the case of poultry. They confirmed that fast-growing breed is not suitable for organic system due to serious problems related to animal welfare (Dal Bosco et al. 2014; Dal Bosco et al. 2010, Castellini et al., 2002).
Different production systems not mean only different in environment conditions (weather factor and access to outdoor or free rang area), with the same breed, age at slaughter, weight at slaughter, feeding (nutritional composition and regime). Yes, for the purpose of hypothetical scientific research is possible to compare only the environment conditions (variable factor) with similarization other factors of production system such as breed, age, weight and feed (fixed factors). But we wanted through our work to simulate the real situation, to evaluate and compare the meat as it is produced and provide for consumer without interfering with its production method. On the same basis our previous published works were dependent (indicated in previous response to you).
This research is mainly aimed as the valuable information for consumers. The consumer is interested in the quality of meat which is available in the marked that produced from those different systems. Producer of each rearing system (particularly organic and traditional systems) promote their products with positive publicity in terms of product quality and animal welfare. Thus, it’s important for consumer the verification of producers claims regarding to the quality of their meat.
References
Leenhouwers, J.I.; Merks, J.W.M. Suitability of traditional and conventional pig breeds in organic and low-input production systems in Europe: Survey results and a review of literature. Animal Genetic Resources 2013, 1-16. doi:10.1017/S2078633612000446.
Nevrkla, P.; Václavková, E.; Rozkot, M. The Indigenous Prestice Black-Pied Pig Breed Differs from a Commercial Hybrid in Growth Intensity, Carcass Value and Meat Quality. Agriculture 2021, 11, 331. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11040331.
Castellini, C.; Mugnai, C.; Dal Bosco A. Meat quality of three chicken genotypes reared according to the organic system. I J Food Sci 2002, 4: 401-412.
Dal Bosco, A.; Mugnai, C.; Sirri, F.; Zamparini, C.; Castellini C. Assessment of a global positioning system to evaluate activities of organic chickens at pasture. J App Poultry Res 2010,19: 213-218.
Dal Bosco, A.; Mugnai, C.; Guarino Amato, M.; Piottoli, L.; Cartoni, A.; Castellini, C. Effect of slaughtering age in different commercial chicken genotypes reared according to the organic system: 1. Welfare, carcass and meat traits. It J Anim Sci 2014, 13: 467-472.
Dear reviewer, we would like to express our thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work.
With kind regards,
Reviewer 2 Report
I agree to accept as it is.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, we would like to express our thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work. Our manuscript now improved thanks for your recommendation.
Reviewer 4 Report
Manuscript can be publishable as is.
Moderate editing of English language required.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, we would like to express our thankful for your comments and your time analysing our work. Our manuscript now improved thanks for your recommendation.
