Cucumis melo Enhances Enalapril Mediated Cardioprotection in Rats with Isoprenaline Induced Myocardial Injury

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The subject of the article is interesting and creative, once analyzed the potential benefits of musk melon alone and in combination with enalapril, and there a cardioprotective treatment for isoproterenol-induced acute and chronic myocardial damage.

 

General comments:

1. In this experiment, all chemicals and reagents used were purchased from standard firms. Please specify the firms? the reagents were procured from authentic suppliers? Please specify the suppliers?
2. What program is used to make the statistics analysis?
3. Why the authors chose cardiac marker enzymes, CK-MB and LDH? Pleased explain in the paper
4. Introduced the statistic tests used in the legends of the tables and figures.
5. Please number the figures correctly.
6. The figures do not have the scale, please place and identify the main constituents, or the altered items .
7. I think I could make the results more appealing and make graphs and not just put tables. The results being interesting, yet very difficult to understand.
8. In my opinion the discussion needs to be improved, I think it has not been explored enough. The authors need to compare this effect to the various constituents mentioned and well in the introduction of the Cucumis melo.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

The subject of the article is interesting and creative, once analyzed the potential benefits of musk melon alone and in combination with enalapril, and there a cardioprotective treatment for isoproterenol-induced acute and chronic myocardial damage.

Response: Thanks for your comments 

General comments:

1. In this experiment, all chemicals and reagents used were purchased from standard firms. Please specify the firms? the reagents were procured from authentic suppliers? Please specify the suppliers?

Response: The details about the chemicals and reagents supplier is now included in section 2.3 of the manuscript

 

1. What program is used to make the statistics analysis?

Response: Statistical analysis was done using GraphPad Prism 8.0 computer software package. A statement is now included in the manuscript.

 

1. Why the authors chose cardiac marker enzymes, CK-MB and LDH? Pleased explain in the paper

Response: Thanks for your suggested respected reviewer. Now explanation is given in the discussion section of the manuscript about the selection of marker enzymes.  

 

When myocardial cells are weakened or killed due to a lack of oxygen or glucose, the cell membrane becomes permeable or may rupture, allowing enzymes to leak out. CK-MB and LDH are myocardial infarction (MI) diagnostic predictor enzymes [20]. These biomarkers' presence in heart tissue homogenate (HTH) indicates myocardial integrity, while their release in serum indicates myocardial injury. In the present study, elevated level of these enzymes in the serum is due to the ISO induced damage caused to the myocardium [21]. The presence of these biomarkers in heart tissue homogenate (HTH) suggests the integrity of the myocardium.

 

 

1. Introduced the statistic tests used in the legends of the tables and figures.

Response: The statistical test details are now included in the legend of table. Figures are re-arranged with footer

 

1. Please number the figures correctly.

Response: We are sorry for the mistake, figures are properly numbered and rearranged.

 

1. The figures do not have the scale, please place and identify the main constituents, or the altered items .

Response: The details about the alteration in the histological slides are included in the legend of the figure.

 

1. I think I could make the results more appealing and make graphs and not just put tables. The results being interesting, yet very difficult to understand.

Response: The figures for presentation of data we usually avoid in articles due to space constraints. Since our respected reviewer has asked, we have converted histological scores into graph in both the models in this submission.

 

 

1. In my opinion the discussion needs to be improved, I think it has not been explored enough. The authors need to compare this effect to the various constituents mentioned and well in the introduction of the Cucumis melo.

Response: Discussion is improved with an addition of role of flavonoids. A detailed description on the constituents of the Cucumis melo is already given in the second paragraph of introduction section.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors investigate the cardioprotective effectiveness and interaction of musk melon with enalapril in a rat model of myocardial damage induced by isoprenaline treatment. Overall, the results are interesting and they could give indications about the impact of food supplements when given together with classical medication. Additional heart function measurements would be valuable. However, the manuscript should be extensively checked for typing and English errors and some paragraphs should be re-phrased for better understanding. Only a few examples are specified below:

• Page 2, line 55: “. literature review” should be “. Literature review”
• Page 2, line 66: Musk melon diminishes heat in the body by and large – not clear, please re-phrase this sentence;
• Page 2, lines 78-81, the word Enalapril is used repeatedly and therefore it is tiring
• Page 3, line 131, the sentence “isoprenaline (ISO, 150 mg/kg, s.c) [10] was regulated to all the creatures” is bizarre, please rephrase
• Page 3, line 130: “Staying three hearts” - not clear, please re-phrase
• Page 3, section 2.3, Apparatus and chemical used. The companies from which the chemicals and equipment were purchased should be mentioned.
• The histology figures should be presented in the form of a scientific collage; there are only two figures and the captions should be Figure 1 and Figure 2, not Figure 5.1.3. and Figure 5.2.3.

Author Response

Reviewer 2

The authors investigate the cardioprotective effectiveness and interaction of musk melon with enalapril in a rat model of myocardial damage induced by isoprenaline treatment. Overall, the results are interesting and they could give indications about the impact of food supplements when given together with classical medication. Additional heart function measurements would be valuable. However, the manuscript should be extensively checked for typing and English errors and some paragraphs should be re-phrased for better understanding.

Response: Thanks for your remarks.

The manuscript is thoroughly checked for any typing and English errors. Number of paragraphs are rephrased to increase understanding. Only the significant heart functions are included in the study.

 

Only a few examples are specified below:

• Page 2, line 55: “. literature review” should be “. Literature review”

Response: It is corrected now

 

• Page 2, line 66: Musk melon diminishes heat in the body by and large – not clear, please re-phrase this sentence;

Response: The sentence is rephrased

 

• Page 2, lines 78-81, the word Enalapril is used repeatedly and therefore it is tiring

Response: The whole paragraph is modified

 

• Page 3, line 131, the sentence “isoprenaline (ISO, 150 mg/kg, s.c) [10] was regulated to all the creatures” is bizarre, please rephrase

Response: We apologize for this mistake, corrected now

 

• Page 3, line 130: “Staying three hearts” - not clear, please re-phrase

Response: Corrections are done in the manuscript

 

• Page 3, section 2.3, Apparatus and chemical used. The companies from which the chemicals and equipment were purchased should be mentioned.

Response: The details about companies are included in the manuscript section 2.3\

 

• The histology figures should be presented in the form of a scientific collage; there are only two figures and the captions should be Figure 1 and Figure 2, not Figure 5.1.3. and Figure 5.2.3.

Response: We are sorry for this mistake. We have organize the figures and scientific explanation is added in the figure footer.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have revised the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments.

I recommend accept

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have adressed my concerns. I recommend publication in the current form.