Quality Evaluation of Complementary Food Produced by Solid-State Fermentation of Fonio, Soybean and Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potato Blends

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General comments:

1. The data was collected well but presented poorly. 

2. The presentation of the reference in the text should be revised

3. Typographical errors there

4. Editorial issues are persistent

5. Clarity in the work is missing

6. Think and write in the readers' perception, and make each point clear 

Title:

1. Should revise, the Orange Fleshed Sweet Potato is not fermented, but the title shows it is also fermented.

Abstract:

1. Abstract has to fine-tune, especially the ending part where presented the results and discussion

Introduction:

1. This section has to improve a lot

2. The present status of malnutrition should give around the world and in Nigeria

3. Support data with the years

4.  Why these ingredients are taken?

5. What is the role of fermentation in this study?

6. Why selected these microbes?

7. What past studies are reported?

8. What are the gaps in this area?

9. Which age group is your targeted population?

10. What is solid-state fermentation? what is the role of SSF complementary food preparation? Is your study a solid-state fermentation?

11. Flow of ideas should discuss

Materials and methods:

1. This is one of the poorest sections in the entire manuscript

2.  In section 2.1 should give clue on How it is collected? what quantities?

What variety?

3. Section 2.2, what is the reference? add citation here

4. Section 2.3 is very poor, it is leading to a big confusion. 

5. In section 2. 4 how decided the cooking time, and temperature? soaking solution and soaking time? 

6. The collected materials are not cleaned?  the seed coat is not removed?  size reduction is not done?

7. Is the Orengefleshed sweet potato also soaked and cooked? 

8. How complementary food blend is prepared?

9. How complementary food is prepared?

10. In section 2.4 data presented in wet base or dry base?

11. How many runs of the experiment are conducted?

13. Better to have an outline image of your experiment

14. In case of citation should change for instance check "Moisture content, crude fiber, ash, protein, fat were determined using [5] method" 

15. In sections 2.5, and 2.5.1 section does not have any text 

16 . After section 2.5.2, 2.5.5 and 2.5.6 should come.  this mineral analysis section should revise

17.  The formula in line 126 should be given appropriately with the notations 

18. There are no materials and methods for the pH, TSS, or functional properties of Vitamins (some) but, results are presented. Hence, they should present her. 

19. Better to give a section on experimental design, factors, levels and runs, and replications

20. Why are pregnant women considered sensory analysis? they are untrained? they are in the first gestation? 

Results and Discussion:

1. The results should mention which base is presented, WB or DB?

2. Line 162 and 163, This could be attributed to the catabolic breakdown of substrates due to fermentation which releases water" Is this justification for your assumption or any reported data? give the proper citation for this

3. Line 181, why the increase in the ash content happened?

4. Give pH and TTA procedures in materials and methods

5. Line 216, How this protein is too high? Orange-fleshed sweet potato is not a rich source of  protein

6. Line 224, why so, low moisture content?

7. Line 231 Why High Fat (6.25 – 8.40%)?  in raw materials it is poor and degraded by the Microbes

8. Viscocsity procedure should be mentioned in materials methods

9. How does viscosity increase as the fermentation is done?

10. In table 2 replace "ph" as pH

11. Minerals should discuss well

12. Where is the discussion of Vit B1

13. Table 4, why some minerals are given in mg/g and mg/100 gm?? why there is a difference in the units for vitamins also? make uniformity 

14. Line 366, remove the first sentence it is not clear

15. Table 6 should be numbered 5, check the numbers 

16. Should sensory analysis explain professionally

17. All results should be discussed properly with the previous studies

18. Need to fine-tune the conclusions

19. Tables should be formatted. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewers Comment

Title

1. Orange Fleshed Sweet Potato was fermented with Lactobacillus plantarum, it is stated in the abstract and likewise the materials and method

Introduction

1. Done
2. Inserted
3. Done
4. The ingredients are taken because of the nutritional contents in them. Orange Fleshed sweet potato is a bio-fortified crop enriched with antioxidant, provitamin A (beta carotene), which when metabolized is converted to vitamin A in the liver. Addition of it to the developed product will help curb micro-nutrient deficiency which is predominant in preschool children in Africa
5. The role of fermentation is to enhance the nutritional content of the raw materials used and make the nutrients available and accessible for infants
6. They are the microbes used for solid state fermentation
7. Few studies have been reported on the use of solid state fermentation for the production of complementary foods.
8. The use of local rice foino in the production of complementary food and the use of orange-flesh sweet potato in solid state fermentation

 

9. Infants and toddlers
10. Solid state fermentation is a fermentation process that involves the use of solid matrix, carried out in the absence or near absence of free water. The role of SSF in the production of complementary food is to enhance the nutritional content, impart flavour and provide a nutritious health benefit safe food. Yes the  study is a solid state fermentation

Materials and methods:

1. Section has been improved
2. It has been stated
3. Done
4. Improved
5. The cooking time and temperature were decided based on the method cited by previous researchers
6. They were all done and it is stated in the method
7. Yes it is
8. Stated in section 2.2
9. The preparation is written in section 2.2
10. Dry basis
11. The experiments were done in duplicate
12. Done
13. Done
14. Done
15. Done
16. Done
17. Inserted
18. Pregnant women were not used, rather nursing mothers were used

Results and discussion

1. Done
2. Done
3. The reason has been stated
4. Done
5. It was not stated that orange-fleshed sweet potato had high protein but rather sample AS had high protein content
6. The moisture content is low due to the drying technique that was applied to the samples after fermentation
7. The reason has been stated in the manuscript
8. Done
9. Inserted
10. Done
11. Done
12. Done
13. Done
14. Done
15. Done
16. Done
17. Improved
18. done

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

 

1. Done and rephrased
2. Novelty and problem statement of the work has been inserted in the introduction. Due to word limit of the abstract, the problem statement cannot be inserted in the abstract.
3. Done
4. Done
5. 50% of fonio and soybean (25% of fonio and 25% of soybean) were blended with 50% OFSP. The blends were used, 25% each to get 50% .
6. Done
7. Yes they are the characteristics of analysis done after fermentation and drying.
8. Okay that will be considered
9. The choice behind the microbes is as a result of the nature of fermentation being carried out. Microorganisms notably used in solid-state fermentation are mostly filamentous fungi of the genera Aspergillus, Fusarium, Rhizopus and Bacteria particularly Lactobacillus spp such as L. planetarium, L. acidophilus are equally used. From literature, Rhizopus is used to ferment cereals and legumes and enhance their nutritional properties while L. plantarum are used to ferment tubers for SSF. These formed the reasons behind choice of microbes. The raw materials were blended so as to complement each other in what they lack, nutrition wise and to have a higher nutrient- dense product at the end considering the target group the product is developed for.       

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am happy that, the authors are addressed all the comments