Michelia Essential Oil Inhalation Increases Fast Alpha Wave Activity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In my opinion the work is very interesting. I have no comments on the part described in the work. But the analytical part is missing to make the work complete. The analytical part mentioned is the analysis of oils from Michelia. The results of the GC-MS analysis with accurate qualitative and quantitative description should be added and attached to the discussion. Without this part, work is incomplete.

The second point is to change (paraphrased) the second sentence in the introduction. How to scientifically define the terms SPIRIT? Spirit is a not scientific concept, not in the field of chemistry.

Work in this form is not suitable for publication. Not enough data to indicate the proposed topic. At this stage, it is only 25% of all work.

Author Response

I appreciate your comments. It improves our article quality. Thank you very much.

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Point 1: In my opinion the work is very interesting. I have no comments on the part described in the work. But the analytical part is missing to make the work complete. The analytical part mentioned is the analysis of oils from Michelia. The results of the GC-MS analysis with accurate qualitative and quantitative description should be added and attached to the discussion. Without this part, work is incomplete.

 

Response 1: The essential oil composition and analysis protocol were described in 2.1 Essential oils.

 

Point 2: The second point is to change (paraphrased) the second sentence in the introduction. How to scientifically define the terms SPIRIT? Spirit is a not scientific concept, not in the field of chemistry.

 

Response 2: The second sentence was edited to “They have several psychophysiological effects on the human body and mind” at line 31.

Reviewer 2 Report

Your paper is interesting and very well written. It strictly follows AIMRAD standard.

The abstract is great, it sounds very good The structure is clear, it follows the standards, it is very easey for a reader to orientate within the text The textflow is fluent, it is written in clear style, no zombie words, obviously the authors follow the rules for academic writing The content is interesting, and results are explained

There are some minor issues to be fixed up:

1) In figures at the end of captions, you explain the meaning of *,**, and *. Sometimes, in some figures, not all of them appear. The caption might be adjusted according to the actual content of the picture. Consider using another kind of description without "=" sign as it might be confusing

2)In Fig. 5, consider using different colors or style of graphical representations in the right part (Female, "Drowsy") - triangles are difficult to read and recognize, they are indistinctive

Author Response

I appreciate your comments. It improves our article quality. Thank you very much.

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Point 1: In figures at the end of captions, you explain the meaning of *,**, and *. Sometimes, in some figures, not all of them appear. The caption might be adjusted according to the actual content of the picture. Consider using another kind of description without "=" sign as it might be confusing

 

Response 1: Significant symbols were edited according to the actual content in each figure and the equals sign has been changed to prevent confusing.

 

Point 2: In Fig. 5, consider using different colors or style of graphical representations in the right part (Female, "Drowsy") - triangles are difficult to read and recognize, they are indistinctive

 

Response 2: The triangles was replaced with dark stars to be easier to distinguish.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors detect the effect of essential oil of michelia alba on the humanb brainwaves   I think the manuscript is good and the study is sound. I recommend the acceptance after some revisions such as   

1. The experimental section should be rewritten with more clearance
2. I think the authors should confirm the chemical composition of this oil with further GC-MS analysis if possible
3. The authors should described more the reported chemical and biological studies of this oil if present
4. The abstract should be more clearance with clear results

Author Response

I appreciate your comments. It improves our article quality. Thank you very much.

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Point 1: The experimental section should be rewritten with more clearance

 

Response 1: The materials and methods section was rewritten as essential oil property, subjects, experimental protocol to clearly explain in each distinguish topic.

 

Point 2: I think the authors should confirm the chemical composition of this oil with further GC-MS analysis if possible

Response 2: The composition was confirmed in 2.1 Essential oils.

 

Point 3: The authors should described more the reported chemical and biological studies of this oil if present.

Response 3: Antifungal, antimicrobial, and antioxidant activities of the oil were added at line 55.

 

Point 4: The abstract should be more clearance with clear results.

Response 4: The abstract was edited to be more specific essential oil type which was extracted from leaves to prevent confusion. The more specific terms were used in result part to explain the clear results.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

From my point of view, there is still no chromatogram from GC-MS analysis. There is no information confirming volatile odor compounds (mass spectra and retention indexes). Where is the evidence that the volatile substances described are the correct ones? From the point of chromatography there is still not enough information.

Author Response

Point 1: From my point of view, there is still no chromatogram from GC-MS analysis. There is no information confirming volatile odor compounds (mass spectra and retention indexes). Where is the evidence that the volatile substances described are the correct ones? From the point of chromatography there is still not enough information.

 

Response 1: Thank you so much, to clarify, mass spectra and retention indexes from GC-MS analysis have been added into supplementary information according to the suggestion. The Michalia alba in this test contained 73.74% linalool as a main component as

 

 

Supplementary Information

 

Figure S1 Gas Chromatogram (GC-MS) of the essential oil of Michalia alba

(the chromatogram was attached in the word files)

Figure S2 Mass spectra of linalool in Michalia alba (5.91min)

(the chromatogram was attached in the word files)

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no comments and accept in this form

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comment.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present article investigates the changes in human EEG activity due to the exposure to Michelia essential oil. Authors observed that michelia oil could reduce alertness level by decreasing beta wave activity and increasing fast alpha wave activity. The present study is interesting, but I have some comments and suggestions in order to improve the quality of this manuscript.

In the introduction section, mention full botanical name (Michelia alba) first time only, then use the abbreviation (M. alba). Line no. 39, use small letters for species name (Michelia alba). In the introduction, the literature review is not sufficient to figure out any clear research question(s). Data Analysis. No any information about the selection of EEG segments and the EEG epochs selected is provided. Were there artifacts and if so, how the epochs were selected? How long (data points/segment) and how many EEG epochs were analyzed? In addition, In the data analysis section: delta wave (0.1 – 4Hz) and theta wave (4-8 Hz) are not included? What is the reason? The study design is not clear. Why did you use only 5 subjects for Linalool group? Because it is general that a lot of statistical variation between the individuals. Improve the English language throughout the manuscript, especially typographical errors like commas, etc.

Reviewer 2 Report

The submitted manuscript by Phanit Koomhin et Al. face an important aspect of the science around essential oils. 

Nevertheless the study, although quite well presented,  should be expanded to other oils and to a grater number of applications to gain full statistical significance. Moreover there is no trace of any information that pushed the authors to study Michelia Alba essential oil, so it is no clear on what basis they have chosen that essential oil. In other words it is missing the rationale of the investigation design. As the essential oil contained more that 70% of linalool the pure linalool effect had to be expected. Furthermore the use of filter paper to administer essential oil seems a quite orthodox procedure, what about by a nebulizer loaded with different EO concentrations? 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

In my opinion the work is very interesting. I have no comments on the part described in the work. But the analytical part is missing to make the work complete. The analytical part mentioned is the analysis of oils from Michelia. The results of the GC-MS analysis with accurate qualitative and quantitative description should be added and attached to the discussion. Without this part, work is incomplete.

The second point is to change (paraphrased) the second sentence in the introduction. How to scientifically define the terms SPIRIT? Spirit is a not scientific concept, not in the field of chemistry.