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.
I thank the authors for revising the manuscript satisfactorily. The current version is suitable for the publication.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Vladimir Uversky, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
-
-
-
-
All revisions were made. The Manuscript is acceted
It is ok
The manuscript is accepted
The manuscript is accepted
The manuscript was reviewed by three independent experts in the field. All the reviewers found the work interesting but raised several issues which should be addressed for further consideration. The reviewers provide detailed comments in their reviews and point out the areas where the manuscript needs to be improved.
**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review and editorial comments are addressed in a response letter and that any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate.
**Language Note:** The review process has identified that the English language must be improved. PeerJ can provide language editing services - please contact us at [email protected] for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title). Alternatively, you should make your own arrangements to improve the language quality and provide details in your response letter. – PeerJ Staff
Please consider declaring ROS as reactive oxygen species in the abstract to increase readability.
1. Please explain the rationale for selecting 27C and 90C as extraction temperatures.
2. Please include a paragraph to introduce the current available methods to quantify antioxidant capacities and why the four methods (TPC, FRAP, ABTS, ORAC) were selected in this study.
-
The authors are advised to consider putting figures 2, 5, and 6 into the supplemental information. A more concise visualization layout would highlight the key messages conveyed in the study.
The manuscript presents an investigation of the bioactive metabolites present in the extract of dill leaves. However, the manuscript can be improved for clarity and magnify the figures according to the style of the journal.
The study design and experimental procedures are unclear and need references.
Results are valid, but the tables or figures summarizing key findings would aid in interpreting the data and enhance the reader's understanding. Figures need magnification. Authors should keep in mind the style of the journal
Authors should update the references of the manuscript, and English language is poor
- Language must be improved where several sentences are not readable and complicated.
- The paragraphs in the article must be properly formatted.
- The references appear to be generally well-formatted, but they need some adjustments to ensure consistency in style. Here are some notes:
- Year placement: Sometimes, the year appears right after the names, and in other cases, after the title. It should consistently follow the authors’ names.
- Title formatting: Some titles are written in all capital letters (Capitalized), while others use lowercase. It is best to follow a consistent style, such as capitalizing only the first word and proper nouns.
- Journal and periodical names: Some references use abbreviated journal names, while others use full names. Standardize this throughout.
- Formatting of volume and page numbers: Some references have extra spaces or inconsistent symbols when listing page numbers and volumes.
- DOI formatting: Some references present DOI as a direct link, while others provide only the number. It is best to use a consistent format.
- Why did you choose two variables in this study?
- What is the rationale behind selecting these specific time intervals: 2 min, 1 h, and 2 h for the time variable in this study?
- Please add the collection site of dill.
- The accuracy of the image Figures in the article should be improved.
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.