Phenolic Acid Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Whole and Defatted Seeds of Italian Hemp Cultivars: A Two-Year Case Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The MS (Phenolic acids composition and antioxidant activity of whole and defatted seeds of three Italian hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) cultivars: a case study of two years) entails nutritional and antioxidant profiling of three cultivars for 2 years. The content of MS falls within scope and aims of the journal and can be on interest to wide readership of AGRICULTURE. However, I have pointed out few ambiguities/deficiencies for author’s consideration.

TITLE: The words like “three”, technical name of hemp and “a case study of two years” might be omitted to impart briefness.

ABSTRACT

=The starting phrase must present problem statement which necessitated conducting this study particularly with respect to whole and defatted seed nutritional profiling.

= Monoecious and dioecious cultivars must be identified in abstract.

= “The Results indicated stronger involvement of year effect on nutritional and antioxidant properties of whole seed than of defatted seed” was it owing to a particular meteorological feature or something else? It must be briefly elaborated in a single phrase.

= “some phenolic acids free and bound (ferulic and p-coumaric acids) showed significant effect of genotype” which genotype remained superior?

=Overall, results have been poorly presented and readers may get confused regarding genotypic divergence among hemp cultivars.

= “The whole and defatted seeds of CS represent an excellent source of protein, lutein and N-Trans-Caffeoyltyramine the most powerful anti-inflammatory phenolic that exerts protective power against in vitro oxidation of human low-density lipoprotein” this is what already known and generalized statement, while I would suggest authors to add recommendation based on recorded findings of this study.

INTRODUCTION

= Common name may be added before technical name and thereafter, only common name may be used to keep uniformity.

= The study rationale is lacking and authors need to establish it by critically analysing peer-findings on the subject matter.

= To avoid localization, it may be suggested that authors need to include global studies on nutritional profiling and antioxidant status of hemp cultivars.

=Authors may consider adding more literature on genetic divergence of hemp and pertinence of studying whole and defatted seed nutritional profiling.

=Additionally, research and knowledge gap has not been highlighted.

=I could not trace out research hypothesis before stating aim and objectives of the study.

METHODOLOGY

=Meteorological features during growth season of crop for both years may be added in order to give readers concise idea of local weather dynamics.

= Details regarding agro-botanical characteristics of the cultivars under study are lacking.

=I could not find out information on research design and replications along with plot size etc.

= Citations are missing for most of chemical and proximate analyses.

= It is perhaps better to add details in tabular form of reagents used along with equipment/instruments details like model and manufacturer etc.

= Why did not authors perform statistical estimation of year’s effect on response variables? If yes then what sort of test depicted significant effect of year?

=Overall, methodology presentation is weak which may compromise repeatability and validity of research findings.

RESULTS

=If the impact of year is significant then it is better to present data year-wise not mean data of years.

= Pairwise correlations between chemical composition of seed (whole and defatted) and precipitations, but not with temperature?

DISCUSSION

=Too generalized statements like the starting phrases might be omitted.

=Authors have not appropriately interpreted the recorded findings, for instance, “protein content of whole and defatted seed differed significantly” but not logic/interpretation has been presented and the same goes on for almost all response variables. It is strongly suggested that peer-findings may be presented after presenting interpretation of recorded results. Another instance is “total polyphenols content (TPC) of whole seeds didn’t show any 388 significant difference among genotypes”.

CONCLUSIONS

=Whether results were in line with postulated objectives? So, better to describe conclusions keeping in view the postulated aims of the study.

=“Moreover, here was found a strictly involvement of precipitations in the variation of phenolics accumulation” needs to be rephrased.

=Readers will remain clueless pertaining to most superior cultivar with respect to nutritional and antioxidant contents?

Author Response

Please see the attachment." in the box if you only upload an attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article by Valeria Mengaa and co-authors "Phenolic acids composition and antioxidant activity of 2 whole and defatted seeds of three Italian hemp (Cannabis 3 sativa L.) cultivars: a case study of two years" contains a large amount of experimental material and is broadly in line with Agriculture journal. However, the interpretation of experimental data, obtained by standard methods, is missing in the presented work. It is also not clear what the scientific novelty of this study is. If it does, then it should be emphasized in the article.

1. Some mistakes are left, all symbols in the text are written incorrectly, and signs which should be superscript are not correctly shown. Egzample "ha-1" should be "ha^-1"
2. Could you explain based on literature sources why the nitrogen to protein conversation factor was used 5.7? As far as I know usually 6.25 nitrogen to protein recalculation factor is used.
3. Section 2.5 "Determination of total phenolic content" could you explain how you obtained TPC content expressed as ferulic acid equivalent in dry weight as in section 2.2 Chemical analysis you claim that frozen but not dried seeds were used in this study.
4. Line 183 "Brief comment on the weather trend of the two years" the sentence is not necessary, it does not provide any significant information.
5. Table 3 what E, (%) mean?
6. Line 329-335 repeating information.
7. I can't find any monthly rainfall and temperatures in table5 as declared in the text.
8.  A sentence like this "This latter compound possesses powerful anti-443 inflammatory power and protective power against in vitro oxidation of human 444 low-density lipoproteins." is not in line with the conclusion. The conclusion must provide information about obtained results and be presented fact after fact.

Author Response

"Please see the attachment." 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

 

Line 156 please add the range of the calibration curve used to calculate TPC.

Line 205 - not necessary that it is a brief comment on weather conditions just start the sentence by giving information about what you want to tell.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx