All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
Your prompt and thorough response to the reviewers' comments and questions is greatly appreciated. Your commitment to delivering exceptional work is evident, and it will undoubtedly contribute to your continued success. Thank you for your diligence and dedication.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Gwyn Gould, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
Please be encouraged by the prompt reviews, and we look forward to your revised manuscript.
**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review, editorial, and staff comments are addressed in a response letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate.
The manuscript with the title: “Fabrication and characterization of oil-in-water emulsions stabilised by whey protein within yogurt matrix” is very well structured and written. The professional english is used throughout. Introduction is appropriately supplemented with literature.
I have some comments for the authors:
L126, L140, L486, Table 4 – In my opinion it is better to use the term “Fat free yogurt” instead of “Free fat yogurt” in the manuscript
L147 – (AOAC, 2019) – in References is different year, please check
L172, L173, L430, L439, L482 – citations (Stirling et al., 2021), (Berg et al., 2019), (Lesme et al., 2020), (Lesme et al., 2019, 2020), (Talwalkar & Kailasapathy, 2004) are missing in References – please add
L175, L186 - citations (by Sanka, Bartkova, Pata, Smolander, et al., (2021)), ((Sanka,
186 Bartkova, Pata, Makuch, et al., 2021) are missing in the references, please add
L249 - ISO norm is missing the year of publication, please correct as follows: ISO 6887-1:2017
L248, L249, L251, L257 – please add citation for ISO norms to the References
L291, L512 - please use term “organoleptic properties” instead “sensory properties”
L317-319 - The sentence is hard to read, please try to rewrite it
L317, L468 – Maybe use term “these/some studies” instead of “these/some workers”
L330, L333, L349… - sometimes you use 1-decimal point and sometimes 2-decimal points, please unify to 2 decimal points throughout the manuscript
L342 – Hebishy et al., 2017b – there is no 2017b citation in References, please check
L345 – please explain o/w shortcut next to its first mention in the text e.g. “oil in water emulsions (o/w emulsions)”
L358 – (McClements, 2004) – please specify if according to References it is 2004a or 2004b
L410 - please correct the term “colourimeter” to “colorimeter”
L 469 – please unify the names of vegetable oils, either use the latin names or english names, please do not mix
L473-475 - I don´t understand what are you trying to say in this sentence, please modify the sentence, maybe the “verb” is missing?
L477 – subchapter 3.6. Microbial aspects, I recommend to follow the structure used in Materials and methods - the Microbiology results should go before sensory analysis results
L496 – It is better to use the term “filamentous fungi” instead of “mold” when referring to determination of yeasts and fungi
L516, L578, L635 – citations missing in the text, only present in References, please check
Reserach is original with well defined research questions. Methods are described sufficiently.
I have some comments for the authors:
L99 - you mentioned the determination of pH, I can not see the methodology for pH determination, please add
L138 - what infrastructure was used for mixing at 15000 rpm? Maybe homogenizer from L132? Please specify
L262 – where are the descriptions on card from? Did you determine them according to some previous sensory analysis or from some publication? Please specify in the text
L264, L268 – did you use the same panel of assessors for 5- and 9- point scale analysis? If yes why did you use both scales with same sensory descriptors?
L267 – how did you determine the importance factors for the 5-point scale descriptors?
In my opinion, the article contains significant novelty and the results can be considered a great contribution to the field of plant-based products.
After making appropriate corrections I recommend publishing this Article in PeerJ journal.
Although well written, the article's impact or justification of the work is limited, for example, the study by Trujillo-Ramirez 2022, 10.1007/s13197-022-05573-3. has a similar study. If the contribution is whey protein and low-fat content to maintain the stability of yogurt, this information can be further substantiated in the introduction of the work.
References recommended most recent for some sections and added in the introduction.
I suggested to improve the schematic representation of the work, for example, the histograms that mean, the percentages are the three combinations, details that do not allow to follow the sequence of the work done. (Fig 1).
figures 5, 6, and 7, can be in one figure only
in the table, it is necessary to indicate the foot of the table, which indicate the values, and add the strain of each microorganism, There is no statistical comparison, at least it is not indicated.
In the conclusion, is necessary a general conclusion to leave the idea of what is next or how this study will impact the feasibility of continuity.
Why not determine the nutritional content of the yogurt used, so as not to be left with only the information on the label, if it was the case, or was taken from a reference, indicated in section 2.2.
Grammatical mistakes, for example, space between the number and mL (L161), space between the number and °C symbol (L152), correct sec for "s" (L138)
In the text L152, the text can only: the oil was removed and the percentage of oil loss was calculated...
M17 agar was used for the Streptococcus culture, specify, Furthermore, was any specific carbohydrate added to this medium, and at what concentration? L253.
The microbiological results, How are reported? L257
Although the statistical analysis is mentioned, the results and discussion are not based on statistical comparison, it is suggested to improve this section.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.