Ultrasonic-Assisted Extraction (UAE) Process on Thymol Concentration from Plectranthus Amboinicus Leaves: Kinetic Modeling and Optimization

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Nur Amirah Asifa Raisha Zahari et al. wrote a paper that presents the kinetic modelling and optimization of the ultrasonic assisted extraction of thymol from P. amboinicus

Overall, the paper is interesting, qualitative and could be suitable for publication in Processes journal.

I have some observations and recommendations regarding the present paper:

-row 35: no space after :

-row 41: nowadays

-row 50: I consider that are necessary more references regarding its properties, not just one

-row 52: no space before A

-row 60: parameter should be parameters

-row 70: indenting before Sample

-row 80: space before 130

-row 80: 20khz should become 20 kHz

-row 81: capitalize first the

-row 86: g:ml should become g/mL or g·mL-1

-row 90: I recommend replacement of analysis with determination or quantification

-row 100: replace ml with mL

-row 173: please correct/explain etc what does P. betle means 

-row 175: no space before The

-row 336: no space before Table 4

-table 4: please arrange Remarks in order to make the table more readable

-row 365: no space after <

-row 376: no space before Lastly

-row 417: no space before These

-row 432: no space before Table

-table 6: put Raw .... in one line

-row 464: no space before At

Author Response

We thank you for all the comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall the study focused in the optimization of the UAE of thymol is interesting. However, authors must done some modifications in order to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Abstract

Authors must give the highest concetration of thymol extracted instead the lowest

Material and methods

Authors must be give more information about the metholodogy used in the UAE as well as the gas chromatography analysis

Authors must reorder this section. In a first stage, they give the information about the Kinetic studies, continue with GC analysis and finally with the Kinetic models

How the authors select the level for the CCD?

Results and discussion

The correct title of this section is “Results and discussion”

Conclusion

This section must be rewrite since appear to be another section of results.

Authors must highlight the result most important based in the main objective

Author Response

Please see the attachment

thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper is interesting and well structured but, in my opinion, cannot be published in this form.

The authors should revise the following issues:

lines 39-41, is really necessary the extraction meaning? line 81, grammar error line 86, Why thechoice of 1:30 g:ml? Add a reference lines 87-88, Did you mean 20°C or 25 °C, please indicate an exact temperature lines  88-89, "The extract was sampled at every 5 minutes in the first 20 88 minutes and followed by every 10 minutes." clarify this sentence line 247, there is a problem with this issue, previously you write that the exctract was sampled each 5 min for the first 20 min and then each 10 min. The time coverage is from 20 min to 40 min so in the first case you sampled 4 times in a medium case 5 times and in the last case 6 times. The number of sampling dosen't change the results?This really confuse me, Please clarify. line 252, Reshape table 1

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Accepted