Impact of Hot Water Pre-Treatments on the Drying Efficiency and Quality of Dates cv. Medjool
, Rama Shankar Singh 1, Ramkesh Meena 1, Mukesh Kumar Berwal 1, Deepak Kumar Sarolia 1 and Preethi Palpandian 2
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments to the Authors
Manuscript ID: horticulturae-2435248
General remarks:
The authors examined the influence of different duration blanching pre-treatments on the immature date fruit subjected to drying. The organization of the manuscript is adequate with performed adequate analysis. The main drawback represents the lack of comparison of the obtained results with already published ones and that needs to be improved. Some typographical errors are present and all tables need revision regarding the letters indicating statistical significance.
The specific comments are listed below.
Abstract
Great introduction of the authors into the reasons and needs for conducting this research. But the introduction sentences should be reduced; and more space should be given to the conducted analysis and the most valuable obtained results (colour, sugars, minerals content). It would be beneficial to include drying conditions and drying technique used.
Manuscript
Line 41: Space is missing before the reference [2]. Please revise.
Line 85: Please use only one of the words separated by slash.
Line 92: Please put the symbol for degrees in superscript.
Line 105: Please include time interval for drzing under fan.
Line 106: Please include the producer for equipment used for drying. Also revise to Figure 1.
Line 107: Please revise. Instead of percent use %.
Line 126: It would be beneficial to include the total colour difference (ΔE) for samples. It is calculated based on the already measured parameters L*, a* and b*. The authors can consult following literature for equation:
Processing of alfalfa seeds by convective hot air drying, vacuum drying and germination: Proximate composition, techno-functional, thermal and structural properties evaluation. Food Chemistry, 402, 134300, ISSN 0308-8146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.134300
Line 130: Please include the producer of the homogenizer as well as the used speed in rpm.
Line 130 and 135: Please include in the text which liquor was used for volume adjusting to 150 ml (line 130) and 25 ml (line 135). I suppose it was distilled water.
Line 134: Please revise. Instead of percent use %.
Line 138: Please revise here also. Instead of percent use %.
Line 150: Please include which liquor was used for volume adjusting.
Line 151 and 152: Please revise aliqat to aliquot.
Line 154: Any special conditions regarding temperature or light? Please include if any.
Line 156: Please revise to absorbance.
Line 157: Please include the number of points and the concentrations used for creating the standard curve.
Line 161: Please revise, there should be no space between words and slash (texture/mouth feel).
Line 169: Please include the concentration of used nitric acid.
Line 172: Please use either chemical symbols or name of the mineral not both. Also please include the number of replicates for this analysis and all previous analysis conducted next to the appropriate analysis in the manuscript.
Line 188: Please revise to statistically significant.
Line 192: Please include the full term for HWT which is hot water treatment I suppose. Or introduce that abbreviation (in parenthesis) after the first mention in the materials and methods section. Furthermore, please indicate which conditions were applied for the control sample here mentioned for the first time.
Line 201: Please revise to significance level.
Line 203: Please include a comment on the results after calculating the total colour difference (ΔE). If there are any results from previous studies on dates, please comment the obtained results against them for each parameter determined here.
Line 209: Please include the adequate colour for values obtained for parameters a* and b* and give comments in the sense of colour change. a* + is red and b* + is yellow.
Line 220: Please revise to significance level.
Line 226, 230, 231, 232: Please include the appropriate units alongside the values.
Line 234: Please delete duration.
Line 246: Please revise to significance level.
Line 254: Please compare the obtained results with previous results on sensory evaluation of date fruit.
Line 264: Please revise to …detected mineral profile was...
Line 285: Please include the method for non-enzymatic brovnin determination in the materials and methods section.
Line 285 and 288: Please revise melanoids to melanoidins.
Line 291: Please revise to significance level.
Line 300: Please revise to reducing.
Line 303: Please revise to polyphenols.
Line 304: Please revise to up to.
Line 316-317: This statement is not justified because only the corresponding variety was examined not several varieties of date fruit.
Line 341: Please check the formatting of the reference list. The year of publishing is missing here.
Tables
Table 1-please use small case letters for marking statistical significance instead of uppercase letters and put them after standard deviation (39.32±3.31a).
Table 2-please apply the same as for Table 1. Moreover include the values for total colour difference (ΔE).
Table 3-please apply the same as for Table 1 and 2.
Table 5-please put the uppercase letters after standard deviation.
Figures
Figure 2- Please include the explanation for each abbreviation on the figure into the figure caption.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
the article is interesting and relevant since contribute to reduce the local surplus production of dates, giving a solution to improve the storability and shelf-life of this fruit. The experiments are generally well designed and performed. The objectives are clearly stated, and the manuscript contains interesting results regarding the hot water pre-treatments carried out for the preparation of dry dates. In general, the manuscript is well organized, and the results shown in the tables and in the figures are clearly explained. Therefore, I suggest only minor revisions and then, the publication of the manuscript.
The detailed comments are listed below:
Line 121. Evaluation of quality parameters regarded only chemical parameters, however for a more complete information about the presence of alterations, microorganisms development is also an important parameter to assess. Did you evaluate microbiological quality of fruit after hot water treatments and during storage? Did you observe molds development? Please add information if present or in alternative add a valid justification about the lack of these values.
Line 255 In Figure 3 non enzymatic browning of dry dates are shown instead of changes in sensory parameters. Please correct.
Please update publications and reviews with special regard at recent laboratory protocols and information about studies on the preparation of dry dates.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.DOCX
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
v2_Comments to the Authors
Manuscript ID: horticulturae-2435248
General remarks:
The authors responded to suggestions.
Some minor typographical issues are to be corrected as well as missing details on the used equipment. The reference list should be check, because there are some reference duplicates and mistakes regarding reference numbers in reference list and the manuscript text.
The specific comments are listed below.
Abstract
Line 20: Please check the font face for ΔE and revise to …was also maximal…
Manuscript
Line 46: Please remove space on both sides of /. Check that throughout the manuscript (lines 108, 117, 121).
Line 108: Please revise to Figure 1.
Line 129: Please include what was the reference for ΔE calculation.
Lines 141 and 152: with space or without space between % and the value. Please uniform.
Line 154: Please include the model and producer of the spectrophotometer used.
Line 164: Please include the model and producer of the spectrophotometer used here as well.
Line 165: Please revise to was used…
Line 169: Please include the age range and gender of panelists.
Line 184: Please check the reference according to the reference list the reference should be 29. Furthermore there are two identical references 11 and 15. Please revise that.
Line 212: Please revise to …different alphabets indicate a significant difference at p<0.05.
Line 237: Here also, please revise to …different alphabets indicate a significant difference at p<0.05.
Line 269: Here also, please revise to …different alphabets indicate a significant difference at p<0.05.
Line 277: Please include a full stop after al. when referring to the authors cited.
Line 311 and 314: Please revise to melanoidins with only one “s”.
Line 317: Here also, please revise to …different alphabets indicate a significant difference at p<0.05.
Lines 383 and 393: Please check this reference it seems that this is a duplicate.
Minor English language issues detected.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.DOCX
