Aroma Profiling Analysis of Peach Flowers Based on Electronic Nose Detection
, Jiyao Li 1,2,3, Zhijun Shen 1,2, Ruijuan Ma 1,2, Juan Yan 1,2,* and Mingliang Yu 1,2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper offers important data related to peach flower volatile profiles, namely of 50 peach germplasm.
Here are my observations:
Abstract: I do not understand this sentence - please rephrase or remove: ``It is with great regret that there is lack of peach floral aroma in landscape effects.``. Emphasize more here on your findings' impact on the further environment and the health of honeybees. Address it more within Introduction section.
English style improvement is necessary for the entire manuscript. Please carefully check the spelling (there are some typo errors- e.g. Figure 2. Dendrogram of 50 peach permplasm based on response values of 10 sensors of E-nose).
When addressing specific works previously published, simply cite them according to the Authors guidelines, and do not specify the paper title within those paragraphs (see lines 75-76).
Mention in section 2.1 if the flowers were directly subjected to the analysis after their collecting. If not, then what were the storage conditions before the analysis?
Text formatting is not the same in the entire manuscript - see lines 210-222.
Lines 259-279 - here include your findings not only specify the ones already published, possibly by comparison to your results.
Author Response
（1）Abstract: I do not understand this sentence - please rephrase or remove: ``It is with great regret that there is lack of peach floral aroma in landscape effects.``. Emphasize more here on your findings' impact on the further environment and the health of honeybees. Address it more within Introduction section.
√We have revised it.
（2）English style improvement is necessary for the entire manuscript. Please carefully check the spelling (there are some typo errors- e.g. Figure 2. Dendrogram of 50 peach permplasm based on response values of 10 sensors of E-nose).
√The language and writing logic of this article have been polished by experts from native speaker of the translation company. The polishing certificate is attached with the modification description, and some spelling has been improved.
（3）When addressing specific works previously published, simply cite them according to the Authors guidelines, and do not specify the paper title within those paragraphs (see lines 75-76).
√We have revised it.
（4）Mention in section 2.1 if the flowers were directly subjected to the analysis after their collecting. If not, then what were the storage conditions before the analysis?
√ The distance between our germplasm material garden and the electronic nose detection laboratory is only about 30 m. We first collected the flower branches of each sample, quickly brought them to the laboratory, and picked the flowers that flowering on that day for sample preparation and detecting. Therefore, no additional storage conditions are required before the analysis. The details of sample collection are supplemented in the modified manuscript.
（5）Text formatting is not the same in the entire manuscript - see lines 210-222.
√We have revised it.
（6）Lines 259-279 - here include your findings not only specify the ones already published, possibly by comparison to your results.
√We have revised it.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Editor!
Manuscript entitled ‘Aroma Profiling Analysis of Peach Flower Based on Electronic Nose Detection’ present interesting results of aroma profile as obtained by E-nose. English language is not of sufficient quality, I strongly suggest to check it by a native English speaker. Authors may find below other topics that need attention.
Abstract: I suggest authors declare that 10 sensors were used capable to detect groups of aroma volatiles.
Introduction:
I suggest authors add shortly toward the end of Introduction part which actual compounds are usually present in peach blossoms.
Materials and methods
I suggest authors declare to which compounds the used sensors are responsive to. There are always interferential compounds that might interfere to specific sensors.
2.2. Flower aroma measurement
It is not clear to me how the aroma volatiles were measured, I suggest authors present it in a schematic way.
Results:
Figure 1: Legend is not clear – which legend belongs to specific curve
Discussion: I suggest authors add compounds detected in peach blossoms from literature data and link these compounds to e-nose data.
Conclusions: I suggest authors modify the last part of discussion (lines 303 -311) and move to conclusions as future prospects.
Author Response
（1）Manuscript entitled ‘Aroma Profiling Analysis of Peach Flower Based on Electronic Nose Detection’ present interesting results of aroma profile as obtained by E-nose. English language is not of sufficient quality, I strongly suggest to check it by a native English speaker.
√The language and writing logic of this article have been polished by experts from native speaker of the translation company. The polishing certificate is attached with the modification description, and some spelling has been improved.
（2）Abstract: I suggest authors declare that 10 sensors were used capable to detect groups of aroma volatiles.
√We have revised it.
（3）Introduction: I suggest authors add shortly toward the end of Introduction part which actual compounds are usually present in peach blossoms.
√We have added actual compounds are usually present in peach blossoms in Introduction.
（4）Materials and methods：I suggest authors declare to which compounds the used sensors are responsive to. There are always interferential compounds that might interfere to specific sensors.
√We have declared which compounds each sensor is responsive to，please see in 2.2 Flower aroma measurement.That is: ‘Each sensor preferentially responded to a class of organic compounds: W1C for the aromatic benzene detection, W5S for nitrogen oxide, broadrange, W3C for ammonia, W6S for hydrogen, W5C for arom-aliph, W1S for broad-methane, W1W for sulphur-organic, W2S for broad-alcohol, W2W for aromatic component and sulph-chlor, W3S for methane-aliph.’
（5）2.2. Flower aroma measurement
It is not clear to me how the aroma volatiles were measured, I suggest authors present it in a schematic way.
√We have added operation method.
(6) Results:Figure 1: Legend is not clear – which legend belongs to specific curve
√We have revised it.
(7) Discussion: I suggest authors add compounds detected in peach blossoms from literature data and link these compounds to e-nose data.
√We have modified and added it.
(8) Conclusions: I suggest authors modify the last part of discussion (lines 303 -311) and move to conclusions as future prospects.
√We have modified and added it.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
First sentence of abstract is not adequate for scientific manuscript. Second sentence if authors investigated 50 peach germplasm it should be written in plural. Carefully check complete manuscript – I will not correct these kind of mistakes! In abstract what does these categories mean?
In introduction authors stated … In spring, peach blossoms have various shapes and colors with a strong visual shock for people. However, for a long time, the lack of obvious floral aroma is a major regret of peach blossom landscapes. – why it would be shock; why major regret – authors need to be careful with expressions they are using and use scientific language otherwise they are making wrong impressions.
Lots of technical mistakes through the manuscript.
Carefully check titles of figures and tables – there are mistakes. Each table and figure should contain explanation of abbreviations.
Authors are presenting results but there is no real connection to practical application as they stated in introduction and discussion section. In order to make this assumptions more experiments should be conducted. It is well known that OAV is very important for detection of flavor compounds and for their real contribution to aroma profile.
Author Response
(1) First sentence of abstract is not adequate for scientific manuscript. Second sentence if authors investigated 50 peach germplasm it should be written in plural. Carefully check complete manuscript – I will not correct these kind of mistakes! In abstract what does these categories mean?
√We have revised it.
(2) In introduction authors stated … In spring, peach blossoms have various shapes and colors with a strong visual shock for people. However, for a long time, the lack of obvious floral aroma is a major regret of peach blossom landscapes. – why it would be shock; why major regret – authors need to be careful with expressions they are using and use scientific language otherwise they are making wrong impressions.
√We have revised it.
(3) Lots of technical mistakes through the manuscript.
√We have cheaked it carefully，and spelling has been improved.
(4) Carefully check titles of figures and tables – there are mistakes. Each table and figure should contain explanation of abbreviations.
√We have revised it.
(5) Authors are presenting results but there is no real connection to practical application as they stated in introduction and discussion section. In order to make this assumptions more experiments should be conducted. It is well known that OAV is very important for detection of flavor compounds and for their real contribution to aroma profile.
√Through the revision of the introduction and discussion, we tried to make the content of the whole article more closely linked.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
English is still the problem, but the major problem is missing OAV. Authors didnt even respond to this comment. OAV defines the flavor compound that have contribution to the overall flavor.
