Solar and Convective Drying: Modeling, Color, Texture, Total Phenolic Content, and Antioxidant Activity of Peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch) Slices
, Harumi Hernández-Guzmán 2, Neith Pacheco 2,*, Juan Carlos Cuevas-Bernardino 2, Emanuel Herrera-Pool 2, Ivan Moreno 1 and Erick César López-Vidaña 3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The reviewed article under the title “Solar and convective drying: modeling, color, texture, total phe-2 nolic content, and antioxidant activity of peach (Prunus persica 3 L. Batsch) slices” concerns comparative assessment the drying kinetics, color, texture, total phenol content, and antioxidant activity of peach slices using different solar and convective drying methods at different air speeds and temperatures, respectively.
On the methodological side, the article is well prepared. Classical methods and research equipment used in this type of research were applied. The authors have elaborated and interpreted the obtained results in an understandable and readable way.
The comparison of different drying techniques, including solar drying, seems purposeful, interesting both from a scientific and practical point of view.
In my opinion, the authors should combine the separate Results and Discussion sections into one Results and Discussion section.
Author Response
We agree with the reviewer's comment that results and discussioncould be merged in one section, nevertheless in the guide of authors the journal suggests the separation of the sections.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study was designed with a good purpose and the results obtained are at a level that will contribute to science. As a result of the findings of this study, the effects of different drying methods and temperatures on the quality characteristics of peach were investigated. It is appropriate to publish the issues that I have mentioned below, if they are edited.
First of all, it should be stated which peach variety is used, whether it is a product obtained from fresh or cold air storage.
It should be stated whether the variety used is a table or an industrial variety and name of variety. Adding these sections will strengthen the scientific infrastructure of the study. Harvest time, dry matter amount, fruit characteristics of the peach variety (flesh color etc.) should be added.
Especially being an early or late peach variety will affect the amount of dry matter and will affect most fruit quality characteristics. This should also be addressed in the discussion section.
Line 15-18 The models used or how many models are used should be mentioned. The next part will be more understandable when the results are compared.
Prunus persica should be written in italics in the text and in the abstract.
Line 21-22 add was found or was observed
Line 48-50 all Literature
Line 154 Why did you compare it with fresh slice as a reference. As far as I have examined, this was not mentioned or discussed in the conclusion part. Instead of fresh slice, it is appropriate to compare the methods with each other.
In the texture and other parameters, the number of repetitions and the number of slices in each repetition should be specified. should be added to the statistics section.
Line 164, 173, 180, 184, 188, 198, 250, 288, 298, 297, 310, 313, 33i, 343, 344: add a reference number to references and update other changes accordingly.
Line 208-214 I think that this generalization is not appropriate to use here. More clear results should be mentioned in the conclusion part.
Graphic lettering must be the same text and graphics. Make a single decision and edit it in lowercase or uppercase.
Line 259-264 This paragraph should not be here. It was probably written twice by mistake. Delete it.
The literatures given to the temperatures as in figure 3 should also be specified in the abstract and method section. Literature number and years should be added.
Line 282-283 The use of a one-sentence paragraph is not appropriate. Combine it with a suitable paragraph or write this paragraph in detail.
It may be necessary to give the literature number of the models in Table 2.
X2 " 4.13 E-4 " Although not completely sure, such values are in case of missing or zero data. please review the data again.
Author Response
- First of all, it should be stated which peach variety is used, whether it is a product obtained from fresh or cold air storage.
Response: We thank the reviewer's comment and the information was added to the manuscript.
- It should be stated whether the variety used is a table or an industrial variety and name of variety. Adding these sections will strengthen the scientific infrastructure of the study. Harvest time, dry matter amount, fruit characteristics of the peach variety (flesh color etc.) should be added.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment and the information was added to the manuscript.
- Especially being an early or late peach variety will affect the amount of dry matter and will affect most fruit quality characteristics. This should also be addressed in the discussion section.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment; the paragraph has been added in line 318 and 399
- Line 15-18 The models used or how many models are used should be mentioned. The next part will be more understandable when the results are compared.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment, the text in the abstract was modified.
- Prunus persica should be written in italics in the text and in the abstract.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment, the scientific name was corrected troughtout the document.
- Line 21-22 add was found or was observed
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment, the word was changed
- Line 48-50 all Literature
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment,
- Line 154 Why did you compare it with fresh slice as a reference. As far as I have examined, this was not mentioned or discussed in the conclusion part. Instead of fresh slice, it is appropriate to compare the methods with each other.
Response: Since the color change monitoring was performed on specific samples and these in turn varied in color (due to their nature and degree of maturity, sugar content, etc.), making a comparison between the different methods used is not an objective analysis since it is not the same initial sample for all the methods tested. Due to the above, the color difference was obtained by comparing an individual sample between its initial color (fresh samples) and its final color (dry samples).
- In the texture and other parameters, the number of repetitions and the number of slices in each repetition should be specified. should be added to the statistics section.
Response: Many thanks for your useful comments and suggestions about our manuscript. According to the opinion of the respected reviewer, we added and applied the desired modifications in lines 168, 179, 183, 192, 204 and 2.9 statistical analysis section.
- Line 164, 173, 180, 184, 188, 198, 250, 288, 298, 297, 310, 313, 33i, 343, 344: add a reference number to references and update other changes accordingly
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment; the numbers references have been updated in each line
- Line 208-214 I think that this generalization is not appropriate to use here. More clear results should be mentioned in the conclusion part.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment, the text has been modified, and the conclusions section has been supplemented
- Graphic lettering must be the same text and graphics. Make a single decision and edit it in lowercase or uppercase
Response: The figures have been modified according to the suggention.
- Line 259-264 This paragraph should not be here. It was probably written twice by mistake. Delete it.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment; the paragraph was deleted.
- The literatures given to the temperatures as in figure 3 should also be specified in the abstract and method section. Literature number and years should be added
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment; the literature number has been added.
- Line 282-283 The use of a one-sentence paragraph is not appropriate. Combine it with a suitable paragraph or write this paragraph in detail.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment; this sentence was integrated into another paragraph.
- It may be necessary to give the literature number of the models in Table 2.
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment; the literature number has been added.
- X2" 4.13 E-4 " Although not completely sure, such values are in case of missing or zero data. please review the data again.
Response: The results have been reviewed and found to be correct.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript deals basically with a comparison of two drying techniques, although in the electric drying oven two options, natural and forced convection, were presented. In general, there is not much novelty in the study, however the results may add to database enrichment. In the discussion section, the noticeable fluctuation in drying rate may need some explanation, especially for the solar drying process; there is much constrast to the rather smooth drying curve.
Author Response
Response: We agree with the reviewer's comment, the text in the discussions was modified.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The requested changes were made by the authors. The work can be published as it is.
Author Response
We appreciate your comments to improve the manuscript.
kind regards
