Introduction
Heywood attempted to determine if the TSP (Texturized Soy Protein) produced from the value-enhanced soybeans affect cooking and sensory characteristics of the ground-beef hamburger patties compared with nongenetically soybeans and ground beef without TSP. During that time period, there is a trend for food producers to add soy protein to different meat products as to improve the sensory attributes and decrease the manufacturing cost. Consequently, Heywood set out to add the TSP to ground-beef hamburger patties to verify the impacts of the addition on cooking and sensory characteristics. Although the author has some good points, his article lacks a detailed process of sensory evaluation. Besides, some experiments didn't be replicated for three times and part of the data analysis is not accurate scientifically.
Metrics
The conclusions are mostly well supported by the results. The paper builds on a good body of research on this topic in this region and is written with same authoritiy. It is also quite well written, apart from lack of clarify in some places, and some specifics. The author makes clear the terms listed, such us value-enhanced soybeans. Most analytical methods are explained in detail.
Critique
This paper has a number of general and specific problems, ranging from the readability, experimental design, flaws in the reporting of the findings and statistical analysis.
The first general problem involves the improper choice of keywords. The words 'genetically enhanced soybeans' should be replaced with the word 'value-enhanced soybeans'. The reason is that value-enhanced soybeans are those that have altered traits either through modification or through traditional plant breeding according to the text. However, the author didn't tell the modification method of soybeans used in this research. Besides, there is a repetition on low-fat soy flour and soy flour to some extent and one of them should be deleted.
The second general problem lies with the hypothesis. A good paper should build hypothesis at first and then verify them finally. in the introduction and verify them in the conclusion. However, the author failed to make a corresponding conclusion to verify the hypothesis presented in the introduction.
The third general problem includes the absence of experimental methods and inaccurate expressions of this paragraph. Firstly, the title 'experimental procedures' would be better if replaced with "Materials and Methods". Secondly, the expression "mixed bulk soybeans, West Central Cooperative(Ralston, IA)" would be better if changed to "mixed bulk soybeans (West Central Cooperative, Ralston, IA)". Thirdly, all the experiment in this research should be triplicated. However, in the soy flour preparation, two replicates were produced for each of the eight treatments. In the cooking protocol, two replications of TSP-extended patties were produced for each treatment. In the proximate analysis, protein was measured in duplicate.
Fourthly, in the preparation of ground-beef patties, the meat was mixed with 30% rehydrated TSP(1:2.6 TSP to Water). It should be explained that if the percentage of TSP to water refers to volume in volume or mass in mass? Meanwhile, the author didn't explain why 30% of TSP was chosen to be mixed with meat. Fifthly, the method of measurement should be written in detail as for the water-holding capacity measurement(WHC) and bulk density(BD). It would also be better to introduce the definition of WHC and BD. Sixthly, as for the color measurement, it would be better to tell what did L, a, b stand for. Sixthly, in table 1, it shows that soy flour's PDI and RO were determined. However, the author forgot to introduce the methods of PDI and RO. Lastly, the research lacks the description of TSP's manufacturing processes and sensory evaluation scheme which are significant parts of this research.
The third general problem is the sensory evaluation. In terms of the sample preparation, the author should provide the information of time interval between samples and instructions to panelists.
The fourth general problem is a misspelling word in the first sentence of result and discussion. The first sentence is "Relationships between soy flour properties and TVP properties" and "TVP" should be replaced with "TSP".
The fifth problem is the absence of the statistical analysis introduction. For example, all the experiments were carried out in triplicate. The difference between 8cooking and sensory propertities for each treatment of beef patties were assessed by ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) followed by Tukey's test with 95% confidence (a = 0.05).
The sixth general problem is that most statistics performed didn't meet the requirement and some analysis are not right. The author should report the mean (average value) along with a measure of variability (standard deviation(s) or standard error of the mean. Besides, according to the data of BD and WHC in table 1, it is wrong to tell that Wc had the highest BD and the lowest WHC. The reason is that there is no significant difference in eight treatments' TSP characteristics (BD and WHC).
The last general problem lies with some inaccurate expressions of the result and discussion. It is said that no significant difference was found in the physical and chemical measurements among all the samples. Which measurements are physical ones? The next sentence shows that the except for tenderness values, there is no significance between the 100% all-beef control and the 30% TSP-extended patties. However, the soy flavor is also an exception which was ignored by the author.
Discussion
The research on which this paper is based has intrinsically importance and once the sensory evaluation scheme is updated, and the data has been processed by the ANOVA, the paper will be excellent and acceptable scientifically.
@lyy2268768
Hi lyy,
In order to assist you in reviewing your article, I need to understand if this is exact article you want to publish. If so, you need to follow the conventional method of reporting a research. Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results,
