Research on the Biomechanical Characteristics of Salted Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper is acceptable but need revision. Necessary corrections should be made and checked.   

 

1) English of the paper should be polished carefully.

2) Check for few minor typos and punctuation mistakes within the text.

3) The difference of the study (originality of the study) from the studies in the literature and the aim of the study should be given in the introduction section with clear sentences.

4) The aim of the paper is not completely well-specified. The authors could specify more this aspect in the abstract and in the introduction of the manuscript.

5) For general readers, authors are encouraged to discuss the possibility to use FEM for modeling the biomechanical characteristics by discussing the following works: [(a) “Microstructural/geometric imperfection sensitivity on the vibration response of geometrically discontinuous bi-directional functionally graded plates (2D-FGPs) with partial supports by using FEM”, Steel and Composite Structures, 45(5), 621-640.; (b) “Static bending and buckling analysis of bi-directional functionally graded porous plates using an improved first-order shear deformation theory and FEM”, European Journal of Mechanics - A/Solids, 96, 104743.; (c) “Nonlinear bending analysis of porous sigmoid FGM nanoplate via IGA and nonlocal strain gradient theory”, Advances in Nano Research, 12(5), 441-455.].

 

6) Figs. 14 and 15 should be more discussed.  

7) Author should add some physical explanation to improve the quality of the paper. Conclusion section must be extended in a few words via main finding and advantages of the methodology.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Zhang et al.  conducted a very interesting study on the biomechanical properties of salted wakame. The problem is clearly and widely stated in the introduction. The methodology is presented in great detail with illustrations.

Reading the manuscript was really interesting. Written in detail and well, I have no significant comments for it.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comment.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors aimed to investigate the, “Research on the biomechanical characteristics of salted wakame 2 (Undaria pinnatifida)”. The authors aims to develop a process which can separate stems and leaves of saline salted wakame. Overall, the manuscript is well written in all sections of the manuscript, followed by sound methods with results from wide study settings. The study is meaningful in the current situation and context. However, I would like to provide the following comments and suggestions being considered before being accepted for publication. 

 

Abstract: I suggest authors mention why this research is important to select and also explain the study design. The results should be a bit more clear to the reader. Also, conclusions should be added in the abstract section. 

 

Keywords are usually written alphabetically.

 

In the introduction part, I would like to suggest authors add some related literature from other related material if possible to justify their study. What has already been innovated, discussed; what is new discovery of this paper? Also, I suggest a few more sentences on how this paper will add to the literature gap? How is this paper be beneficial in terms of stem research?

 

Method, could authors first describe the outcome variables in detail and then for covariates?

 

Results are expected to be a bit more clear to the reader. Could authors re-write the results section of the paper. 

 

In the discussion section, authors should highlight the strengths of the study while limitations should be extended more precisely noting down biases associated with.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx