Zearalenone Removal from Corn Oil by an Enzymatic Strategy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The results of the manuscript seem to be quite promising, however, in order to fully demonstrate the enzymatic removal of ZEN, it should be also applied to real samples.
Author Response
Point 1: The results of the manuscript seem to be quite promising, however, in order to fully demonstrate the enzymatic removal of ZEN, it should be also applied to real samples.
Response 1: The crude corn oil sample was donated by Xiwang Group Company Limited, which is the largest industrial production of corn oil on China. We simulated the degumming and neutralization of industrial corn oil refining process in laboratory and optimized the major parameters to remove the ZEN during the neutralization. A larger scale of corn oil detoxification was performed in a 3 L-bioreactor simulated the neutralization of industrial alkali refining. In the future, we will carry out further systematic research aiming at industrial corn oil processing.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript concerns to a study that produces recombinantly in Pichia pastoris an enzyme that detoxifies zearalenone. According to the authors the produced enzyme is capable to detoxify ZEN in crude corn oil. The manuscript seems to be scientifically sound. However, it needs some corrections of English form and also some clarification in the material and methods section. The discussion section (lines from 236 to 260) needs also to be improved. The English form is not the most adequate. Authors should follow my comments in the attached document. I recommend the publication of the manuscript in this journal after the requested changes are made.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Point 1: The manuscript concerns to a study that produces recombinantly in Pichia pastoris an enzyme that detoxifies zearalenone. According to the authors the produced enzyme is capable to detoxify ZEN in crude corn oil. The manuscript seems to be scientifically sound. However, it needs some corrections of English form and also some clarification in the material and methods section. The discussion section (lines from 236 to 260) needs also to be improved. The English form is not the most adequate. Authors should follow my comments in the attached document. I recommend the publication of the manuscript in this journal after the requested changes are made.
Response 1: We are grateful for your comments and revisions, they were highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. We have modified carefully according to the highlighted notes in the attached document, some English form were also revised. Some expressions in “5.3. Retreatment of Crude Corn Oil” and “5.4. Experimental Design and Treatment” in M&M have been further clarified. The discussion from lines 236 to 260 was also revised. All the changes in the manuscript are shown by using the "Track Changes" function in Microsoft Word. Please find attached a revised version of our manuscript. Thank you again for your valuable comments on our manuscript.
