Response to Reviewers

Candidate Name: Beatriz Elena Hoyos Ortiz

Title of Research Proposal: Biochemical characterisation of the northern Australian-grown

black sesame as a source of bioactive compounds

I wanted to express my sincere gratitude for the invaluable suggestions, comments,

feedback and edits provided by each of the reviewers. Their input has truly enriched the
contents of my thesis, making it more comprehensive and meaningful.

The general suggestions provided by both reviewers regarding the

grammatical/editorial/textual corrections (which are many), have been incorporated in the
thesis revision as tracked changes but not included in the response to reviewers table to
avoid a lengthy response. Additionally, responses that were straightforward were discussed
with the supervisory team and included with their support in the revised thesis without
specific inclusion in the response table. All other major queries or comments requiring
definitive responses are provided in the response table. and can be seen as track changes in
the revised thesis.

All directions by the reviewers in regards toregarding referencing have been adopted.
Vancouver reference style has been only adopted within the whole thesis. All sections
referring to ‘nutritional constituents’ have been amended as ‘bioactive compounds’. Data
presentation format has been standardised across the thesis and error bars have been
included on all data sets presented in figures. Data sets recorded for field-grown and
commercially sourced samples have been integrated into one table, relocated to Appendix
F, and numbered accordingly. The figure format (i.e. histograms) has been adopted across
the Analysis and Discussion of results. All feedback from reviewers referring to duplicated
data sets/diagrams/tables have been addressed byand deletetiond.

The Abstract section has been succinctly condensed following the constructive suggestions
provided by both, the supervisory team and the two reviewers.

The directive 'Please refer to page X, line Y' indicates the specified modifications that have
been amended within the new thesis version.

Reviewer no 1
Page no & comment as per Response to the Reviewer*
the examiner’s report or
marked up thesis
Page 24, Chapter 1. The reference 5 is not the most suitable reference review in
Introduction, 1.1 Background the previous thesis version. Hence, this reference was
and problem statement, line removed. New references (5 and 6) have now been
11:
Reference 5, is this the most
appropriate review?
Page 25, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
11:
unclear do you mean a lot of
suitable land for this crop?
Page 25, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
13:
why black explain the
different types then why the
focus on black
Page 25, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
15:
but why
incorporated on page 23, line 11. These references highlight
bioactive compounds in sesame and their health benefits,
including inflammation reduction. These references are
available online:
Reference 5:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6943436/
Reference 6:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29032105/
The reference list section has also been updated accordingly.
This section has been amended for further clarification as
follows: ‘where there are large areas of suitable land
available with climate suitability for commercial production
of this crop.’
Please see this reflected on page 24, line 11-13.
The following paragraph has been incorporated to explain
why black sesame was selected for the current study.
‘Previous research initiatives incorporated various white
sesame varieties from diverse regions in the 1980s. The
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organisation (CSIRO) launched non-shattering sesame
breeding for mechanised production in 1989 (1). This
program incorporated light-colour sesame genotypes
sourced from Japan, Mexico, Myanmar, Korea, and
Venezuela (2); however, there was a notable absence of
information regarding the suitability and development of
black sesame genotypes in the Australian context. To
address this gap, Timilsina (1) conducted further research,
selecting various black sesame genotypes for rainfed
adaptation and drought tolerance. The author identified the
most suitable lines with improved morpho-physiological
features under two different irrigation regimes at Alton
Downs (Central QLD). Recommendations from this earlier
work created a strategic opportunity for the current study.’
Please refer to page 24, lines 14-24.
The following paragraph has been amended to clarify the
focus of the research project, on page 24, lines 25-33:
‘This study aims to address the lack of information regarding
the bioactive compounds of Australia-grown black sesame
seeds, particularly under two different irrigation conditions.
Specifically, this study aims to estimate the typical levels of
the major secondary metabolites (phenolics, lignans, and
fatty acids) in the whole sesame seeds, sesame oil, seedcake
and sludge, using reliable and validated methods, for
different black sesame genotypes grown with and without

Page 25, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background thesis version is unclear. Hence, this section has been
and problem statement, line
28:
this makes no sense do you
mean water stress to force
the plant to increase bioactive adopted by previous studies (7–10) as irrigation stress may
levels? Some background is
needed
Page 25, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
29:
do you mean varieties
commercial
Page 26, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
5:
not the same as
pharmaceutical products
Page 26, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
7:
none were measured just
implied
Page 26, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
10:
and by association and what is
known about these are likely
to be beneficial for human
health, but your study does
not evaluate directly health
benefits
Page 26, Chapter 1.
Introduction, 1.1 Background
and problem statement, line
11:
supplemental irrigation during the growing season in Central
QLD. This approach has been considered in previous
breeding programs with the aim of developing sesame
varieties with improved nutritional and health-promoting
properties (3–6).’
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the previous
amended including the requested background as follows:
‘A strategic approach involves comparing the levels of
bioactive content in sesame varieties cultivated under full
and reduced irrigation. This method has been widely
induce higher levels of secondary metabolites.’
Please refer to page 25, line 13-16.
The highlighted section refers to sesame samples grown in
field trials for potential commercial investment. Hence, no
further amendments were conducted in this section’
Please refer to page 25, line 17.
The section has been amended as “This potential can be
translated into the production of value-added products that
offer additional health benefits to consumers.”
Please refer to page 25, lines 20-21.
The reviewer is correct, and the section has been amended
as follows: ‘This thesis will provide an overview of the key
bioactive compounds and their potential health benefits
associated with consuming sesame as a source of functional
food.’
Please refer to page 25, lines 25-26.
The reviewer is correct, and the section has been amended
as follows: ‘These health-promoting effects potentially could
be associated with elevated levels of secondary metabolites,
including phenolics, lignans, and fatty acids.’
Please refer to page 25, lines 26-28.
The reviewer is correct, and the section has been amended
as follows:
‘In this context, the essential focus is to identify and quantify
these compounds, aiming to select the varieties most suited
will only adopt if there is good
genetic heritability of the
measured trait
Page 28, Chapter 1.
Introduction. Section 1.2 Aims
and scope of the research.
Line 3:
same as aim 2?
Page 28, Chapter 1.
Introduction. Section 1.3
Structure of the thesis.
Line 16:
mature or immature seed?
Page 37, Chapter 2. Literature
review. 2.5 Typical levels of
key biochemical composition
and uses of sesame. Line 22:
why difference in #articles
Page 37, Chapter 2. Literature
review. 2.5 Typical levels of
key biochemical composition
and uses of sesame. Line 27:
What do you mean by this?
Page 39, Chapter 2. Literature
review. 2.6 Phenolics, lignans
and fatty Acids: the key
bioactive compounds in
sesame. Line 16:
this does not describe fig 2-5
i suggest maybe a fig showing
typical structure
Page 40, Chapter 2. Literature
review. 2.6 Phenolics, lignans
and fatty Acids: the key
bioactive compounds in
sesame. Line 11:
what is etherified? why
repeat mostly fig 2-5?
Page 41 & 42, Chapter 2.
Literature review. 2.6
for commercial production in northern Australian growing
conditions.’
Please refer to page 25, lines 28-30. .
The aim 4 has been amended as follows:
“The fourth and final aim was to compare the levels of the
key bioactive compounds present in Australian-grown black
sesame with light-colour sesame and dark-colour sesame
obtained from commercial sources”
Please refer to page 27, lines 15-17.
According to Timilsina (2021), “blooming season” refers to
the mature seed.
In addition, the section was amended as follows for further
clarification: ‘The study assessed the effect of variety and
irrigation levels maintained until late blooming stage on the
levels of bioactive compounds in sesame seed.’
Please refer to page 27, lines 28-29.
The duplicate “bioactive compounds” has been amended as
“water stress” instead.
Please refer to Page 38, line 27.
The section ‘extended’ has been removed without affecting
the meaning of the statement.
Please refer to page 38, line 31.
Correct. The Figure 2-5 illustrates a general overview about
the classification of phenolics according to their distribution
in plants. The highlighted section by the reviewer introduces
the Figure 2-6, which illustrates the most typical chemical
structures of phenolics. This figure has been amended and
now denoted as Figure 2-7. The amendment includes the
chemical structure of a typical phenol for further
clarification. The figure caption for original 2-5 has also been
modified as follows: ‘The structure of a typical phenol
(upper) and the structures of typical phenolic acids found in
nature (lower) (Adapted from Šamec et al. (143)).
Please refer to page 42, line 10-11.
The term ‘etherified’ refers to hydroxycinnamic acids which
include a conjugated form with an ether group in their
chemical structure. The Figure 2-7, which refers to
‘etherified phenolics’ was misplaced in the previous thesis
version and has been removed, as it created confusion due
to duplication of the content already illustrated in Figure 2-
5. Please refer to page 42, line 15.
The chemical structures of the major and minor lignans
present in sesame have been redistributed in two rows
Phenolics, lignans and fatty
Acids: the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. After
line 19:
images poor resolution
Page 56, Chapter 2. Literature
review. 2.8 Methods for the
edible oil extraction. Line 33:
described as "Pressing" in T2-
4 not screw-press method
change to be consistent.
Confirm which method is
referred to in this table here
Page 53, Chapter 2. Literature
review. 2.9 Sesame derived
by-products from the oil
processing. Line 12:
describe what the differences
are is cake residual solid and
sludge some sesame material
combined with solvent?
A picture or schematic might
be useful for the unfamiliar
reader
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
24:
how
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
27:
define stages of growth for
sesame plants
including a better quality of each figure. The figure caption
(Figure 2-8) has been modified by removing the ‘s’ from
‘bottom rows’ and with a new reference.
Please refer to page 43, line 13-15.
‘Screw-press method’ has been amended as ‘pressing’ in
Table 2-4. This change has been carefully considered and
used within the whole thesis. Nevertheless, the section
‘Moreover, the screw-press method used by researchers at
the CQUniversity’s facilities based at Central Queensland
Innovation and Research Precinct (CQIRP) in previous trials
(1,11), makes practical sense to utilise it in the current study
rather than investing in or acquiring different extraction
equipment. Hence, the justification for using the screw-press
method relies on equipment availability, cost-effectiveness,
efficiency, consistency in results, and compatibility with the
research goals and objectives of this research project.
However, it is important to note that the phytochemical
profiles of the oils can also be influenced by factors such as
the planting location, maturity of the plants, and prevailing
weather conditions (12)’ has been removed, as per the
second reviewer’s suggestion without affecting the meaning
of the given information. Please refer to page 58, line 32.
A clear description of the two by-products and a picture
(Figure 2-11) have now been incorporated on pages 58 and
59, lines 24-30 and 3-5, respectively, to distinguish between
sesame cake and sesame sludge.
Crop performance for each of the eleven cultivars was
assessed, with three field replications used for no moisture
deficit, ensuring that 100% crop evapotranspiration demand
(ETC) was met. Additionally, three field replications were
used for the water-deficient treatment (50% ETC).
Please refer to page 62, line 24.
A table defining stages of growth for sesame plants has been
added (Table 3-1) on page 62, line 30.
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
28:
is this in reference list with a
number otherwise more
details needed
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
29:
how
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
29:
equipment and conditions?
Page 61, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
13:
what was the subsample size
relative to yield for each rep. I
presume each field rep was
analysed
Page 61, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
14:
in air-tight receptacle?
Page 61, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
27:
explain what this is
Page 62, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
1:
details on company, city,
The reference corresponding to the research work
conducted by Timilsina (2021) has been now updated on
page 62, line 29. In addition, the reference list has also been
updated on page 179.
Each line was manually cleaned. In addition, samples were
air-dried until pods reached complete dryness. Threshing
was the next step conducted also manually, using different
sieve sizes (1). Please refer to page 63, lines 7-9.
The air-dried process was conducted by exposing the
samples to the sun inside the glasshouse until pods reached
complete dryness. Please refer to page 63, line 8.
Subsamples of 250 g were oven-dried and portions of
samples from each seed type (around 100 g) were retrieved
for the different analysis in the present study. Specifically, 50
g of each field replicate were ground into a fine powder, and
20 g were allocated for oil extraction. Regarding your second
concern, each field replicate was analysed, and an
illustration (Figure 3-1) has been also incorporated for
further explanation. Please refer to page 64, line 8-9.
The containers used to store each of the samples were
sterile polystyrene water sample screw cap containers,
specifically the ones with yellow caps, each with a capacity
of 120 mL (Thermoline Australia). Please refer to page 64,
lines 12-14.
The following description has now been incorporated on
page 65, lines 5-8: ‘A reference standard solution for food
analysis, namely Restek Food Industry FAME Mix (REST-
35077) was obtained from Shimadzu (Rydalmere NSW).
Stock standard solution (1 mg/mL of FAME mix) was
prepared in DCM.’
Details on company, city, country or origin regarding the
Memmert oven have been incorporated as reflected on page
65, line 13-14.
country or origin
Page 62, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods. Line
22:
for how long
Page 65, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.2
Materials and Methods.
Line 6:
Unclear
Line 7:
describe in more detail
Page 66, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.3
Statistical analysis. Line 8:
what about field replicates
how was that accounted for
or did you pool to make one
sample per
genotype/treatment? What is
your blocking term
Line 10:
balanced or unbalanced
design?
Line 14:
what method was used to
identify true outliers
Page 66, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line
26:
re-write describe what is
significantly different and why
isn't
The methanolic extracts were stored for around 3 months.
No further amendments were incorporated in this section.
Please refer to page 65, line 1-2.
In order to clarify the method, the following explanation has
been incorporated on page 68, lines 20-22:
‘Milli-Q® water (1 mL) was added to this tube, and the
resulting lower aqueous layer was removed and discarded
using the same glass pipette. This process was repeated two
times more’.
Regarding how the field replicates were accounted for. In
this study, all three field replicates were considered
separately.
The following information has been incorporated for further
clarification on page 69, line 27-28: ‘for a factorial analysis
(irrigation and genotypes as two independent factors).’
In this study, a balanced design was carried out and each
combination of the two independent variables (variety and
irrigation treatment) was tested. It allowed to obtain
meaningful comparisons and observations about the effects
of these variables. Please refer to page 69, line 29, which
reflects this amend.
True outliers were identified based on the
percentage covariance applied to the lab duplicates. The
covariance was set at 10%. Results above this value were
discarded and therefore, the analyses were repeated, until
the 10% was met. This information has been included on
page 70, line 1-3.
The following statement has been re-written to accurately
describe what is significantly different in the moisture
content estimated for the field grown replicates: ‘There was
a significant difference (3.60 – 4.70%) noted in the moisture
contents obtained from the oven-drying assessment of the
eleven sesame varieties (one-way analysis of variance
[ANOVA]; F = 3.87, p < 0.05); however, there was no
significant difference regarding the water irrigation
treatment on the average percentage of moisture content
(one-way analysis of variance [ANOVA]; F = 3.87, p > 0.05),
except for varieties 4, 8, 10, 12 and 13.’
 This information has been reflected on page 70, line 14-19.
Page 67, Chapter 3. Bioactive Amended as: ‘Observations from this study indicate that
potential of the Australian- four varieties (4, 8, 12 and 13) had increased average
grown sesame seed. 3.4 moisture values, with higher levels in the WD treatment
Results and Discussion. Line 8: than the WW treatment, as can be seen in Figure 3-2.
any explanation Meanwhile, five varieties (1, 2, 5, 7 and 17) had no
WD vs WW any trend? seems remarkable differences between the two irrigation
higher in WD for some treatments; however, variety 10 had a greater moisture
samples are significant but content in the WW treatment than the WD treatment
why would this be (Figure 3-2). These variations in moisture content across the
field-grown sesame samples could be attributed to genetic
factors and the location of cultivation (11,13–15).’ Please
refer to page 70, line 22-28.
Page 70, Chapter 3. Bioactive The relevance about moisture content has been slightly
potential of the Australian- amended and relocated on page 69, line 15-18, as follows:
grown sesame seed. 3.4 ‘Higher levels of moisture content in the seeds have been
Results and Discussion. Line 1: associated with a reduction in the oil content of the final
maybe put this in the product (115), which ultimately leads to more susceptibility
beginning of this section to to mould growth and microbial development (216). These
show why it is important to factors can adversely affect product quality and safety.’
measure the %M
Page 71, Chapter 3. Bioactive Yes, the reviewer is correct. Hence, the table note has been
potential of the Australian- amended and a reflection of this has been included in
grown sesame seed. 3.4 Appendix F – Table 3-1.
Results and Discussion. Line
14:
values with same letter within
a column and between
columns are not significantly
different, p<0.05 is this what
you mean
Page 73, Chapter 3. Bioactive The reviewer is correct, and the section has been corrected
potential of the Australian- by removing “all eleven sesame” and incorporating “most of
grown sesame seed. 3.4 the” instead, on page 74, line 8.
Results and Discussion.
Line 1: Correct. After analysing the minimal variations in percentage
samples 13 17 18 show no sig moisture content existent amongst varieties 18, 17 and 13
difference in fig 3-3 (21.82%, 14.71% and 6.33%) in the WD treatment compared
to the WW treatment, it was determined to better include
Line 7: the statement suggested by the reviewer. Thus, it has been
but not sign diff incorporated on page 74, line 15.

Page 76, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line 2:
with the same treatment
Agree. “with the same treatment’ has been incorporated on
page 76, lines 20-21.
Correct. The highlighted section has been amended by
removing ‘all sesame varieties’ and incorporating ‘most
 sesame varieties’. Please refer to page 76, line 24.
Line 5:
incorrect 13 17 18 no sig diff The following justification has been incorporated: ‘This
fig 3-3 increase in secondary metabolites serves as an adaptive
strategy that has evolved over time to help plants cope with
Line 20: a wide range of abiotic stresses. This adaptive behaviour
assumed the treatments WD often involves the activation of specific metabolic pathways.
and WW were applied equally The phenylpropanoid biosynthetic pathway is likely the most
across genotypes its the studied pathway of secondary metabolism behind the
response of those varieties to stimulated biosynthesis of phenolic compounds induced by
the moisture stress that might abiotic stresses, such as water deficit (16). Water deficit
differ. A typical genotype by regulates many key genes encoding main enzymes of
environment effect please phenylpropanoid pathway, which results in stimulated
consider this too biosynthesis of phenolic compounds (17).’
Please refer to page 77, line 3-11.
Page 78, Chapter 3. Bioactive The superscripts have been included in all datasets;
potential of the Australian- however, as per suggested by both reviewers, the FRAP
grown sesame seed. 3.4 dataset has been allocated in Appendix F – Table 3-5.
Results and Discussion. Line 2:
maybe include superscripts?
Page 78, Chapter 3. Bioactive The reviewer is correct, and the highlighted section has been
potential of the Australian- amended as follows: “Varieties 7, 1, and 4, were 34.10%,
grown sesame seed. 3.4 30.67%, 24.99%, higher in the FRAP values under the WD
Results and Discussion. Line 1- treatment than in the WW treatment. In contrast, two
2: varieties 10, and 2 were 30.64%, and 21.51% greater in the
although 5 8 12 13 17 18 were FRAP values under the WW treatment than in the WD
not sig diff between WD & treatment. In addition, varieties 5, 8, 12, 13, 17, and 18 were
WW not significantly different between the two water
treatments”. Please refer to page 78, line 1-5.
Page 78, Chapter 3. Bioactive There was indeed a sample size discrepancy between the
potential of the Australian- commercial sourced samples and WD/WW categories. The
grown sesame seed. 3.4 primary focus of the current study was indeed the
Results and Discussion. Line comprehensive analysis of eleven sesame genotypes.
19: The inclusion of commercial samples was intended for
Different number of samples method development and comparative purposes and served
in the groups; 1 sample for as a reference point for comparison rather than forming the
CBS vs 11 in WD/WW groups core of this investigation. As sample CBS resulted in higher
will affect statistical FRAP content than the rest of the tested samples, this result
comparison. More could be attributed to genetic differences amongst sesame
commercial samples should genotypes (29). Therefore, a necessary correction was
be tested (if they exist) but if incorporated on pages 78 and 79, line 22-23 and 1-2.
looking for the highest FRAP In addition, it is acknowledged the difference in sample
genotypes, seems CBS is the numbers together with the importance of a balanced sample
best choice distribution for statistical comparisons. The current
distribution was chosen to maximize the representation of
the sesame genotypes under study. Overall, no field grown
samples stood out within the antioxidant capacity test

Page 80, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line 5:
very low
Page 81, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion.
Line 1:
Re-write something like The
higher mean AO obtained
under WD may be ...
Line 14:
why did ratio WD/WW be
much lower in some G than
the majority showing the
effect of WD is not always
consistent thus your
hypothesis would not be
supported
Page 85, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line
10:
discuss the findings from
CUPRAC vs FRAC do varieties
rank same?
evaluated by FRAP compared with the dark-coloured
commercial sourced samples. Nevertheless, just two field
grown samples had comparable values, with higher values in
varieties 4 and 7 in the WD treatment than the light-
coloured samples procured from commercial sources (CWS,
AF-V6821 and AF-V6832). Please refer to page 78, line 19-22.
The results reported by Yasmeen et al. (2020) were indeed
very low due to the use of sesame powder and a mix of
other minor components and conducting FRAP assay.
Therefore, the author reported the lowest FRAP values for
this specific sample. In addition, the Table 3-9 was relocated
on Appendix F, and it is now labelled as Table 3-6.
The highlighted paragraph was incorrect. This paragraph has
been amended on page 79, line 14-16 as follows: ‘Therefore,
it is postulated that the genotypes with higher mean
antioxidant based on FRAP acid values in the WW treatment
can be categorised as sensitive to water stress, as described
in other studies (9,10).’
The WD/WW ratio was notably lower in certain genotypes
than most of the varieties which exhibited higher FRAP
values in the WD treatment than in the WW treatment.
Therefore, the paragraph on page 79, line 10-14 was
amended as follows:
‘There seems to be an interaction of genotype and irrigation
regime, which resulted increase in some and a decrease in
other genotypes under water deficit. In line with other
studies (9,10), the antioxidant activity measured by FRAP
was generally more genotype-dependent for the higher
ratios than water treatment dependent for the lower ratios
in this study.’
The following discussion amongst the results obtained by
FRAP and CUPRAC methods has been incorporated on page
82, line 4-14:
‘The evaluation of antioxidant activities using the FRAP and
CUPRAC methods revealed notable variability across all
sesame samples. The CUPRAC method exhibited generally
higher levels of antioxidant activity than the FRAP method.
While exceptional sesame samples (varieties 1, 4, 7, and 12)
subjected to WD treatment showed greater antioxidant
activity than those with WW treatment, a few exceptions
(varieties 2 and 10) displayed higher antioxidant values in
the WW treatment tested by FRAP assay. This is the same
genotype, but the assays are different. The two assays have
the capacity to evaluate different types of antioxidant
compounds. Meanwhile, varieties 1 and 5 demonstrated
 higher antioxidant activity (around twofold and threefold) in
the WD treatment than in the WW treatment, as
determined by the CUPRAC method.’
Page 88, Chapter 3. Bioactive Correct, and anAn appropriate correction has been
potential of the Australian- incorporated on page 85, lines 12-14: ‘These observed
grown sesame seed. 3.4 results indicate that water deficit treatment appeared to
Results and Discussion. Line 9: affect the sesamin content in sesame samples, by exhibiting
the letters above bars indicate higher sesamin content in most of the sesame samples
no sign diff between WD and subjected to WD treatment, except for varieties 4, 7, 13 and
WW for variety 4 7 13 17 17.’
please check
Page 92, Chapter 3. Bioactive The following paragraph has been re-written for further
potential of the Australian- clarification: ‘Sesamin content values subjected to each of
grown sesame seed. 3.4 the irrigation treatments (WD and WW), were comparable
Results and Discussion. Line 1: to results previously reported worldwide (18–21). Although
re-write sesamin content had generally higher values when subjected
to WD treatment, it can be attributed to a natural reaction
response produced by the plant (10,22–26).’
Please refer to page 86, lines 26-29.
Page 93, Chapter 3. Bioactive Correct, and theThe following paragraph has been
potential of the Australian- incorporated for further clarification: ‘Compared to the
grown sesame seed. 3.4 sesamin content, the effect of WD treatment was generally
Results and Discussion. Line more evident in sesamolin content across almost all sesame
12: genotypes, except in variety 7, which particularly showed no
compared to sesamin, only 1 significant differences in sesamolin content between the two
sample showed no sig diff in irrigation treatments (WD and WW).’
sesamolin between WD and Please refer to page 88, line 7-10.
WW, 7 a more convincing
effect of WD
Page 94, Chapter 3. Bioactive This exception has been included in the previous
potential of the Australian- explanation. Please refer to page 89, line 5, which reflects
grown sesame seed. 3.4 this change.
Results and Discussion. Line 7:
except 7
Page 95, Chapter 3. Bioactive The section has been amended by removing “all” and
potential of the Australian- incorporating “most of the sesame varieties had higher
grown sesame seed. 3.4 average sesamolin values under WD treatment than in the
Results and Discussion. WW treatment”.
Line 2: Pleasse refer to page 88, line 20-21.
except 7 significantly
The section “presented the lowest difference (12%)” has
Line 5: been removed and changed as: “Only variety 7 had no
and were not signif different remarkable differences in the average sesamolin content
between the two irrigation treatments (WD and WW), which
values were 1.08 mg/g and 0.94 mg/g of seed, respectively.”
Please refer to page 88, line 22-24.
Page 98, Chapter 3. Bioactive Amended by removing ‘slightly increased’ and incorporating
potential of the Australian- ‘slightly decreased’ on page 90, line 26.
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line
22:
numbers show lower levels in
normal vs WD not increased
Page 99, Chapter 3. Bioactive The physiological reasons behind the wide variations in
potential of the Australian- lignan content could be due to an evolution mechanism of
grown sesame seed. 3.4 the plant (17). The primary cause behind this is likely
Results and Discussion. induced during irrigation deficit conditions, in which there is
Line 9: an adjustment of the phenylpropanoid biosynthetic pathway
what might be the (17,27). Water deficit influences several crucial genes
physiological reasons for responsible for encoding essential enzymes in the
higher lignans in WD vs WW phenylpropanoid pathway, leading to increased production
of various bioactive compounds to protect the plant from
unfavourable environmental conditions (17,28). Please refer
to page 91, line 3-9.
Page 105, Chapter 3. Bioactive The superscripts have been now incorporated next to the
potential of the Australian- specific values.
grown sesame seed. 3.4 Please refer to Appendix F – Table 3-12, which reflects this
Results and Discussion. Line 3: amendment.
why no letters next to values
Page 106, Chapter 3. Bioactive Correct, and the following paragraph has been incorporated
potential of the Australian- to indicate the average PUFA content calculated on the field-
grown sesame seed. 3.4 grown replicates: ‘The Figure 3-18 indicates the total
Results and Discussion. Line 5: polyunsaturated fatty acids (total PUFA) content on each of
average of what the field the field-grown replicate, separated by variety and irrigation
replicates? condition.’ Please refer to Page 96, line 14-15.
Page 111, Chapter 3. Bioactive The ideal or preferred ratio it is that emphasizes a Σ PUFA/Σ
potential of the Australian- SFA ratio exceeding 0.45 (29–31). Food items falling below
grown sesame seed. 3.4 this ratio are considered undesirable for human diet due to
Results and Discussion. Line their potential to elevate blood cholesterol levels.
12: Please refer to pages 100, line 30-32.
what the ideal or preferred
ratio SFA:USFA
Page 111, Chapter 3. Bioactive The reviewer is correct. The mentioned varieties in the
potential of the Australian- previous thesis version (13, 5 and 4 under WD treatment)
grown sesame seed. 3.4 did not present necessarily high levels of TPC, lignans or
Results and Discussion. Line antioxidant contents. This statement has been reviewed
17: considering the highest levels of all health benefits (TPC,
how did their TPA and AO lignans and antioxidant contents) as follows:
levels compare? were the ‘Among the field-grown sesame genotypes analysed, the Σ
varieties also high in these PUFA/Σ SFA ratio that promotes health benefits, was
traits that contribute to achieved by all eleven field-grown sesame samples resulted
health benefits so you want with a superior value of 0.45, ranging between 1.86 and
more than just FA please 2.34. Meanwhile, ω-6/ω-3 PUFA ratio varied from 33.7 –
bring together 65.5, with lower ratios in varieties 2, 4, 5, 8 and 18 under the
 irrigation deficit environment.
Varieties better adapted to irrigation deficit were 1, 2, 4, 5,
7, 8, 10 and 12, which recorded the most representative TPC
values. Moreover, varieties 1, 4, 7, and 12 could tolerate
water deficit as per their recorded increased FRAP values.
Meanwhile, varieties 7, 10, 12, 13, and 18 demonstrated the
highest CUPRAC values, with no significant variations
between the irrigation regimes applied in field trials.
Moreover, lignan contents (sesamin and sesamolin) resulted
richer in varieties 1, 2, 5, and 8 and better adapted to the
water deficit regime.’
This amendment has been reflected on page 101, line 1-13.
Page 111, Chapter 3. Bioactive Although number of samples selected from field trials was
potential of the Australian- limited in the current study (N=11), it is believed that sample
grown sesame seed. 3.4 size was sufficient including two irrigation treatments (WD &
Results and Discussion. Line WW), three field replicates of each irrigation treatment, and
20: duplicates of phytochemical analyses. In this way, sample
number samples is limited size may be appropriate for addressing the specific research
despite many measurements questions within the given scope. Overall, the aim was to
taken and this would affect identify general trends on each of the phytochemical
the r values obtained analyses and to recommend the most optimum sesame
traits with higher levels of bioactive compounds for further
investigation.
The above justification was not incorporated within the
thesis.
Page 112, Chapter 3. Bioactive The reviewer is correct. TPC is typically correlated with
potential of the Australian- various antioxidant activity assays (i.e., ABTS, DPPH, FRAP,
grown sesame seed. 3.4 ORAC, CUPRAC) to evaluate the total contribution of the
Results and Discussion. Line 8: respective analyte. As the correlation coefficient between
it was very low with CUPRAC TPC and CUPRAC assays resulted negative and very low, this
so why does the TPC which could indicate the total phenolics could not be the main
would usually be corr to AO components responsible for reducing the antioxidant
assays have such low r values activity. Therefore, the specific statement has been
in your study? amended as follows: ‘Recently, Ruslan et al. (32) observed a
strong but significantly negative correlation (r = -0.976, p <
0.01) between the TPC and EC50 FRAP in sesame seed
extracts. The authors attributed these results to increased
TPC values found in sesame extracts with higher values in
dark-coloured than in light-coloured extracts. A more recent
report (33), claimed significant correlations between FRAP
values and TPC (r = 0.708, p < 0.01), together with other
correlations between different minor compounds. The
authors obtained a significant (p < 0.01) and highly linear
correlation between TPC and antioxidant activity (measured
by different protocols) suggesting that the TPC could be a
good indicator of the antioxidant activity. Hence, the weak
relationships found between TPC and the total antioxidant

Page 112, Chapter 3. Bioactive The reviewer is correct. The correlations recorded between
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line
13:
yet very low correl in your
study
Page 112, Chapter 3. Bioactive The section has been amended as follows: ‘As it was stated
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion. Line
16:
re-write more than one AO
assay?
Page 113, Chapter 3. Bioactive ‘perfect’ has been removed in the paragraph.
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.4
Results and Discussion.
Line 2:
in some cases yes a perfect
correlation of r=1 but not all, India (5), reported negative relationships between certain
so please revise term
Line 15:
these are weak correl revise
Page 114, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-
grown sesame seed. 3.5
Conclusions. Line 4:
looking at Figure 3-3, 3-5, 3-7
activity (measured by FRAP and CUPRAC) in the current
study may suggest that the lower correlation observed may
be attributed to the specific genotypes of sesame seeds used
in this work.’
This amendment has been reflected on page 103, line 3-14.
TPC and sesamin (r = 0.25, p < 0.05), and TPC and sesamolin
(r = 0.39, p < 0.05) resulted in weak positive associations
(page 103, line 15-16). Hence, the key lignans sesamin and
sesamolin may not be indicators of the contribution to the
estimation of the total phenolic content. In consequence,
the highlighted section by the reviewer in the previous thesis
version has been amended, as follows:
‘Previous lignans correlations, including sesamin and
sesamolin, have shown minimal or no antioxidative
effectiveness in traditional in vitro evaluations (34);
however, they can transform into potent antioxidants
through in vivo metabolic alterations in their structure (35–
37).’
Please refer to pages 102 and 103, line 17-18 and 1-3,
respectively.
by Apak et al. (38), the use of more than one antioxidant
assay would be preferable to clarify this response.’
Please refer to page 103, line 23-24-.
Please refer to page 103, line 26.
‘strong’ has been removed from the general statement, and
the section has been slightly amended as follows:
“Contrastingly, previous findings in sesame genotypes in
fatty acids. Whilst a strong negative correlation coefficient
was observed between oleic and linoleic acids (r = - 0.96, p <
0.01), a negative relationship was observed between
palmitic and stearic acids (r = - 0.44, p < 0.01), and palmitic
and arachidic acids (r = - 0.40, p < 0.01).”
Please refer to page 104, lines 3-7.
Correct. To consider specific sesame traits for widespread
adoption, it should have mentioned all those varieties with
higher bioactive content better adapted to water deficit
regime. The following paragraph has beenammendments
incorporated on page 105 and 106, line 26-33 and 1-10,
variety 4 has higher levels and
for CUPRIC 1,2,5 are lower
than 8 10 12 13 18
Page 116, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.3 Oil extraction. Line 9:
where is this in 4-1
Line 16:
it would be helpful to show all
the products-the raw
material-sesame seed, the oil,
the seed cake and the sludge
as images/photos of real
samples
Line 17:
not consistent with
description above
Page 117, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.3 Oil extraction.
respectively.
‘The different analyses carried out on field-grown sesame
samples indicate that specific varieties responded positively
to water deficit (WD) conditions, showing increased levels of
TPC, FRAP, CUPRAC, and lignans (i.e., sesamin and
sesamolin).
Varieties better adapted to irrigation deficit were 1, 2, 4, 5,
7, 8, 10 and 12, which recorded the most representative TPC
values. Regarding the total antioxidant activity, varieties 1, 4,
7, and 12 could not tolerate water deficit as per their
recorded increased FRAP values. Meanwhile, varieties 7, 10,
12, 13, and 18 demonstrated the highest CUPRAC values,
with no significant variations between the irrigation regimes
applied in field trials. Moreover, lignan contents (sesamin
and sesamolin) were greater in varieties 1, 2, 5, and 8, which
were better adapted to water deficit regime. Particularly,
variety 10 had also increased sesamolin content, with higher
values in the WD treatment. Furthermore, to ensure optimal
health benefits, the balanced ratio of unsaturated and
saturated fatty acids (Σ UFA/Σ SFA ratio) was achieved by all
eleven field-grown sesame samples with a superior value of
0.45 (ranging between 1.86 - 2.34). Meanwhile, the ω-6/ω-3
PUFA ratio varied from 33.7 – 65.5, with lower ratios in
varieties 2, 4, 5, 8 and 18 under the irrigation deficit
environment. The recorded sesame traits could be
potentially cultivated as the most promising lines for
widespread adoption.’
‘Press-barrel’ has incorporated within Figure 4-1.
Please refer to page 108, line 20
Figure 4-2 has been incorporated including real pictures of
sesame products (i.e. sesame seeds, sesame oil, sesame
cake and sesame sludge).
Please refer to page 109, line 19.
The “household oil screw-press expeller” has been amended
as “automatic oil screw-press machine”.
Please refer to page 108, line 21.
The following paragraph has been amended for further
clarification about sesame cake: ‘During the oil processing
(Figure 4-2), a press cake was produced as the primary by-
Line 7:
how is that made
Page 117, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 16:
so you have 6 data values for
each sample
Page 119, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 8:
Are the 11 samples=all the
Australian grown sesame
varieties available is this what
you mean or all the 11
samples tested...
Page 120, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 11:
please check these dont seem
to match the data in 4-2
Line 11:
do you mean #18?
Page 124, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 5:
re-write
Page 127, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil.
Line 6:
only "2" all others no sig diff
Line 9:
only 2 was sign diff
Page 127, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
product by volume from each seed sample.’
Please refer to page 109, line 11-12.
Yes, each of the three field replicates (N=3) of each sesame
variety (N=11) and water treatment (N=2) were utilised
during the oil extraction. Therefore, 66 samples of sesame
oil were extracted. Duplicates of each oil sample were
analysed using HPLC and GC-MS. Thus, 132 samples resulted
for phytochemical analyses. Please refer to on page 109, line
8-14.
The previous thesis version presents ambiguity about the
tested samples and used for oil extraction. To avoid this, the
section ‘across all Australian-grown sesame’ has been
amended as ‘all field-grown samples tested’.
This amendment has been reflected on page 111, line 28.
The reviewer is correct. Therefore, the respective paragraph
has been amended. to match the data as follows: ‘Major
differences were noted in varieties 8 and 18, with higher
average values in the WW treatment (16.39 ± 0.45% and
22.89 ± 0.37 %, respectively) than those in the WD
treatment (10.33 ± 0.95 and 16.76 ± 0.33 %, respectively),
whereas these values decreased in varieties 4 and 12 in the
WD treatment (12.57 ± 1.50 % and 11.96 ± 0.61 %)
compared to the WW treatment (16.54 ± 0.79 % and 15.83 ±
1.33 %).’ Please refer to page 111, line 17-22.
The section has been removed, without affecting the
meaning of the whole paragraph.
Please refer to page 115, line 5.
The two suggestions given by the reviewer have been
adopted, as follows: ‘Based on the results obtained, it was
observed that variety 2 exhibited the highest average
sesamin content under WD treatment compared to WW
treatment, while other varieties showed no significant
difference in sesamin content.’
Please refer to page 116, line 1-3.
‘Particularly, variety 2 displayed higher average sesamin
content (60.08%) under the WD irrigation treatment
compared to the WW treatment, as depicted in Figure 4-5.’
Please refer to page 116, line 3-5.
The section has been amended as per the reviewer’s
suggestion: ‘Varieties 1, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, and 18 exhibited
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 12:
no also 1 3 8 10 12 13 18
Page 129, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 9:
CWS vs CBS seem to differ
based on stdev but they share
same letter "a" why
Page 130, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 30:
one would hope that the
differences found in your WD
WW samples are not error in
the method although the
stdev are quite large
Page 132, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 5:
again WD vs WW only sig diff
for sample 2 with sig
differences between varieties
like 2 vs all (for WD).
How does this figure compare
with 4-4 is pattern the same?
Page 144, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 10:
is it possible to have a figure
showing the total SF MUFA
PUFA as histogram for all 11
varieties to make easy
comparison in addition to the
tables?
Page 144, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis of the
sesame oil. Line 21:
minimal variations in the average sesamin content among
the two irrigation treatments.’.
Please refer to page 116, line 5-7.
Lowercase letters in Figure 4-5 were incorrect. The correct
figure is now denoted as 4-6 and has been incorporated.
Please refer to page 117, line 3.
Stdev are quite large may be due to oil sample pipetting.
Based on the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC)
the extraction processes are fine based on relative
comparison. However, going forward more effort should be
placed to improve the repeatability of the HPLC analysis.
The previous justification has been incorporated on page
118, lines 23-25 for further clarification.
Figures 4-4 and 4-6 are now denoted as Figures 4-5 and 4-7,
respectively.
The section has been amended as per the reviewer’s
suggestion, as follows: ‘From the observed results, only
variety 2 had a significant difference in the average
sesamolin content under the two irrigation treatments,
while the rest of the varieties showed minimal or no
significant differences, as can be seen in Figure 4-7.’
Please refer to page 119, line 19-21.
Regarding the pattern illustrated in Figures 4-5 and 4-7:
‘Overall, the pattern illustrated for sesamin and sesamolin
contents (Figures 4-5 and 4-7 respectively) presented
generally the same trend.’ .
Please refer to page 120, line 3-5.
The requested figure (showing the total SFA, MUFA, PUFA as
histogram for all 11 varieties) has been incorporated to
make easy comparison on page 131, line 1.
Clarification has been included to describe differences on ‘In
contrast, Kadkhodaie et al. (10) reported linoleic, oleic,
palmitic, and stearic acids were the major components of
the total fatty acids in sesame oil, ranging from 27.5–39.4 %,
why these differ to yours
highlighted above
Page 146, Chapter 4. Fatty
acid profiling of sesame seed
oils. 4.9 Conclusions.
Line 16:
or say by the WD treatment
since the water stress
imposed was specific to your
expt and a general statement
like this can be misleading as
water stress can be variable
(low--very high)
Page 148, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.1
Overview. Line 5:
a pictorial of the process and
products would be helpful
identifying them with real
images
Line 13:
45.3–49.3%, 5.5–10.4 %, and 5.0–8.7 %, respectively. These
four fatty acids constituted about 98% of the total fatty acids
in their study. Among the ten sesame genotypes tested, the
authors reported that most of the varieties produced oleic
acid as the most prominent fatty acid with a significantly
higher range (p<0.05) under the water-deficit treatment
(ranging from 47.4 – 51.6%) than in the well-watered
treatment (ranging from 45.4 – 49.3%), except for three
genotypes. Meanwhile, linoleic acid was the second most
representative fatty acid in their study, which had the
opposite effect due to the reduction of the level of irrigation,
with a significantly lower range (p<0.05) in the water-deficit
treatment (ranging from 27.5 – 37.8%) than in the well-
watered treatment (34.4 – 39.4%), except for two
genotypes. These differences could be attributed to the
variation of irrigation regimes (three different levels), the
variation in sesame genotypes (ten different varieties), the
duration of the different irrigation levels applied on field
trials (possibly corresponding to growth stage), and the
intrinsic physiological response specific to genotypes,
influencing the production of more or less fatty acids
irrespective of the irrigation treatment applied.’
Please refer to page 131 and 132, lines 11-22 and 1-5,
respectively.
The reviewer is correct. The section ‘affected by both water
stress’ has been now amended as ‘affected by WD
treatment‘, as per the reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 134, line 32.
A pictorial of the oil extraction process and the suggestions
given by the examiner have been incorporated in Chapter 4.
Please refer to page 107, line 20.
TPC, FRAP and CUPRAC assays were not conducted on
sesame derived by-products to be more efficient and to save
time, the data was given on seeds and cake and the detail
for the oil was calculated as the difference. The oil is difficult
to analyse due to the polarity difference between the
sample (oil) and reagents used for the analyses. This makes
it difficult to analyse the TPCs and antioxidants in the oil
directly. The lignans are the key specific bioactive
why not the total phenolics
and AO too?
Line 20:
why not the sludge too?
Page 149, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.2
Materials and Methods. Line
24:
how
Page 150, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.2
Materials and Methods.
Line 5:
looks oily even after drying
Page 153, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line 3:
wasn't as TP and AO not
measured revise
Line 6:
why
Page 158, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil difficult to validate the findings observed in this study.”
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion.
Line 10:
more like validating your
results does not make the
conclusions you obtain not
definitive
Line 24:
physical recovery of extracted
compounds. Having these values are more important than
having the TPCs and antioxidants in the oil.
The following statement has been incorporated as a
clarification of the stored samples: “Subsequently, each
dried sample mass was recorded and stored (4°C) using the
same storing test-tubes (sludge) and plastic bags (cake) until
required for further analysis” on page 137, line 23-25.
Both by-products (cake and sludge) resulted from pressing
sesame seeds. Despite freeze-drying all samples, remaining
oil was yet present in all samples for all varieties. Freeze-
drying removes uniquely remaining water within the
samples but does not remove complex mixtures such as oil.
This remaining oil requires further processing (i.e. solvent
extraction) to ensure an oil-free sample. For a further
explanation, please refer to page 137, lines 26-32.
The reviewer is correct. The two paragraphs prior section
5.4.1 were removed as they seemed more like a summary.
This was due to keep the section concise and without
affecting the integrity of the whole section, as per the
second reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 140, line 24.
The analysis of FA was limited to sesame cake due to the
process of transesterification for fatty acid methyl esters is
notably intricate and time-consuming. Sludge was rather
recommended for further investigation. No further
amendments were applied to this section.
The reviewer is correct. The section has been amended as
follows: “Furthermore, the lack of reports available makes it
Please refer to page 144, line 10-11.
The terminology defined by the reviewer has been adopted
and incorporated as follows: ‘Hence, this lower friction may
lead to an incomplete physical recovery of extracted mass
and decrease the output material.’
Please refer to page 144, line 25-26.
mass to weigh and determine
yield?

Page 161, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line
11:
what is the ideal storage %M
to aim for
Line 20:
not stated as being measured
in M&M
Page 163, Chapter 5.
Characterisation of By-
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion.
Line 11:
why no significance letters
above bars
The ideal storage percentage moisture to aim for: ‘According
to the IS 7836 Indian standards (39), the percentage of
moisture content should not exceed 9%. This threshold is
crucial to maximise shelf storage and maintain sample
integrity (40).’ Please refer to page 147, lines 9-12, which
reflects this amendment.
The section 'antioxidants' has been amended as ‘major
lignans’ (sesamin and sesamolin). Please refer to page 147,
line 20 which reflects this amendment.
The Figure 5-6 in the previous thesis version (sesamin
content in sesame cake) was incorrect, as no significance
letters were indicated above bars.
Please refer to page 148, line 1, which reflects the correct
Figure.
‘In the cake’ has been incorporated in Figure 5-6. Please
refer to page 148, line 2.

Line 12:
in the cake (should be in the
title)
Page 167, Chapter 5. The Table 5-7 has been amended, including the summary of
Characterisation of By- average sesamin content of the 11-research samples
Products Generated during Oil estimated in sesame cake, for easier comparison. This Table
extraction from Australian- is now denoted as (Table 5-2). Please rRefer to page 151,
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 line 7.
Results and Discussion. Line 4:
include your summary result
(mean of 11 varieties) in table
5-7 for easier comparison
Page 170, Chapter 5. The letters of significance have been incorporated in Figure
Characterisation of By- 5-8, as per the reviewer’s suggestion on page 152, line 16.
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line 1:
letters of significance apply
Page 171, Chapter 5. The letters of significance have been incorporated as per the
Characterisation of By- reviewer’s suggestion in Figure 5-9. Please refer to page 154,
Products Generated during Oil line 1.
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line 1:
letters above bars sign
Page 173, Chapter 5. There were indeed vValues overlapped between sesame,
Characterisation of By- peanut, and soybean. The previous thesis version was
Products Generated during Oil slightly amended as follows : ‘Amongst various edible
extraction from Australian- oilseed cakes, such as soybean, kenaf, hemp, peanut and
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 chia, sesame cake appears to be a promising comparative or
Results and Discussion. alternative source of protein content (45.3 – 45.9%), due to
Line 23: comparable values in other edible oilseed meals such as
there is overlap in values soybean 33.0 – 56.27% and peanut, 44.5 – 55.9%, and
between sesame and peanut higher than kenaf 26.2%, hemp 32.2% and chia 33.3%.’
soybean-please revise Please refer toon pages 155, line 21-25 to reflect this.
statement
Lower moisture content decreases mould and microbial
Line 26: growth (41,42). A target of moisture content below 9% (39)
how is this beneficial and contributes to reducing food spoilage. Please refer to page
what is the target moisture 155, line 27-29, which reflects this amendment.
for avoid microorganism
spoilage
Page 179, Chapter 5. The letters of significance have been incorporated in Figure
Characterisation of By- 5-11, as per the reviewer’s suggestion on page 159, line 14.
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion.
Line 13:
no letters above bars as in 5-
10
Page 182, Chapter 5. The Figure caption has been amended as per the reviewer’s
Characterisation of By- suggestion on page 162, line 2.
Products Generated during Oil
extraction from Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion.
Line 14:
of cake?
Page 185, Chapter 5. The statement ‘The observed yield results for sesame cake
Characterisation of By- and sludge were relatively similar’ was incorrect. Thus, an
Products Generated during Oil amendment has been incorporated: ‘The observed yield
extraction from Australian- results for sesame cake were generally similar at around 35%
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.5 on average among all black sesame cake material analysed,
Conclusions. regardless of the irrigation treatment, suggesting that the
Line 5: impact of water stress on the yield of this by-product was
yields are very different 35 vs not significant. On the other hand, the corresponding
8 analysis of sesame sludge presented a similar trend in yield
Page 187, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.1
Overview. Line 4:
poor expression re-write
Page 190, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.2
Evaluation of moisture
content in sesame products
including seed, cake and
sludge Line 28:
please comment on what
~level of %M will this happen
Page 191, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.2
Evaluation of moisture
content in sesame products
including seed, cake and
sludge
Line 2:
also the WD WW treatment
details volume of water
applied to crop, how applied,
when applied as well as the
interaction between the
genotype, environmental
conditions, soil conditions and
their interaction can affect
these %M achieved
Line 24:
with different water
amounts?
results but the yield volume was around 8%. The average
yields remained remarkably consistent across all black
sesame sludge materials analysed, regardless of the
irrigation treatment (WD and WW). Therefore, it can be
postulated that the influence of water stress on the physical
recovery of extracted mass of these two by-products was
minimal.’
Please refer toon page 164 and 165, lines 10-17 and 1,
respectively.
The highlighted section by the reviewer has been removed
as it was irrelevant in the previous thesis version.
Please refer to page 166, line 4
The following paragraph has been incorporated on page 169,
line 29-30, as per the reviewer’s suggestion: ‘The percentage
of moisture content should not exceed 9% (39,40).’
The reviewer’s suggestion has been adapted in a paragraph
as follows: ‘however, these findings can indicate that this
impact may vary depending on the sesame product and its
inherent moisture content. In addition, it is noteworthy to
acknowledge that parameters such as irrigation treatments
(WD and WW), the specific application of certain volume of
water, its method of application, and the period aspects of
water application, in conjunction with, the intricate
interactions involving genetic attributes, environmental
parameters, and soil conditions, significantly influence the
ultimate moisture content achieved’. Please refer toon page
170 line 1-7.
The terminology ‘conditioning seed material’ was employed
to elucidate various preparation techniques (i.e such as
roasting, vacuum microwave, and non-roasting treatments)
that intrinsically include a modification of moisture content
(with different water amounts). Thus, sample conditioning
procedures can enhance efficacy of the pressing method
employed in the extraction of sesame oil.
Please refer to page 170, line 30-32, which reflects a brief
description of sample conditioning methods.
Page 192, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.2
Evaluation of moisture
content in sesame products
including seed, cake and
sludge Line 2:
any suggestions worth noting
here
Page 192, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.3
Sesame seed products yield
for oil, cake and sludge. Line
4:
re-write
Page 192, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.4 TPC,
FRAP, CUPRAC
Line 22:
express as a % increase for
comparison
Page 192, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.2
Evaluation of moisture
content in sesame products
including seed, cake and
sludge Line 25:
explain the physiological
reason here why WD
treatment results in higher AO
The following recommendations have been incorporated as
per the reviewer’s suggestion on page 171, line 19-30:
“Alternative methods for the optimisation of the pressing
method could be the adjustment of moisture content or an
upgrade of the mechanical press equipment. The first
method encompasses sesame seeds undergoing a drying
process to achieve their optimal moisture content prior to
oil extraction through the pressing method. Roasting,
dehulling and oven-drying are potential options to achieve
this (43). The second method would be an upgrade of the
pressing method, such as hydraulic presses. This technique
emerges as a viable alternative method that offers the
advantage of operating at room temperature, and notably
hydraulic presses rank as the second most time-efficient
option when compared to pressing, solvent and Soxhlet
methods (44). Therefore, the adjustment of moisture
content or the use of hydraulic presses are suggested as
alternative methods for sample preparation and to ensure
the highest quality and yield of sesame oil.’
The section has been slightly amended as follows: ‘It is
important to highlight, therefore, that the major focus of
this study was to understand the effect of water stress on
the phytochemical content in sesame, so that the pressing
technique was one of the most convenient methods to
extract cleaner and solvent-free oil with minimal impact on
the quality and the structural integrity of the recovered
sesame products.’
Please refer to page 171 and 172, lines 31-33 and 1-2.
The difference between FRAP and CUPRAC assays was
expressed as follows: ‘This difference was approximately
1300% higher in the CUPRAC assay than FRAP assay for WD
treatment. Similarly, the antioxidant power measured by the
CUPRAC assay resulted in 1400% higher (1609.03 ± 1095.03
mg TE/100 g DW) than in the FRAP assay (113.76 ± 27.00 mg
TE/100 g) in the WW treatment.’.a % increase. Please refer
to page 172, lines 15-18.
Higher levels of the antioxidant capacity may be due to an
adaptative response of the plant to water deficit (45). This
adaptability likely arises from the regulation of the
phenylpropanoid pathway in response to deficit irrigation.
These insufficient levels of water may influence various
pivotal genes involved in encoding crucial enzymes within
the phenylpropanoid pathway. As aIn consequence, this
modulation leads to an enhanced synthesis of various
antioxidant compounds, serving as a defensive strategy to
protect the plant from environmental stress conditions

Page 193, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.5
Lignans in sesame products.
Line 22:
why might this be
Page 195, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.6 Fatty
acid profile in sesame seed
products Line 13:
how do these relative
comparisons compare with
the literature
Page 195, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.7
Recommendations. Line 14:
needs a re-write. Is yield the
only recommendation
would you recommend a
series of more studies to look
at various water deficit
(17,28). Please refer to page 172, lines 37-34.
The differences in lignan profiles between the two irrigation
levels can be attributed to their genetic differences of the
seed material, leading to differential expression of crucial
enzymes within lignan biosynthesis pathways, specifically
the shikimic acid or the phenylpropanoid pathway (17,27,46–
48). Please refer to pages 173 and 174, lines 33-34 and 1-2.
The relative comparisons in the previous examined thesis
version did not include fatty acid profile reported globally.
An additional paragraph was included to explain this. The
following paragraph was incorporated: ‘The results from this
study were comparable with international studies on this
crop (8–10,49–51). MUFA extracted from Soxhlet method in
a recent study (49) and measured by gas chromatography-
flame ionization detector (GC-FID) technique were
comparable, with higher values in sesame oil (42.87%) than
in sesame seeds (41.34%) and sesame cake (41.21%),
whereas PUFA had higher values in sesame cake (42.76%)
than in sesame seeds (41.99%) and sesame oil (41.45%).
Meanwhile, MUFA and PUFA transesterified with a different
FAME protocol in a previous study (10) were comparable in
sesame oil, with higher MUFA values and richer oleic acid
content (45.3 – 49.3%) than PUFA values, particularly
linoleic acid content (27.5 – 39.4%), whereas SFA values
were lower, accounting for palmitic and stearic acids (5.5 –
10.5% and 5.8 – 8.7%, respectively). Overall, these
differences could be due to modifications within the
analytical parameters and the choice of solvents employed
(8–10,49–51). Amongst various parameters, it is noteworthy
to highlight that sample size, oil extraction techniques (i.e.
Soxhlet method, cold-pressing), along the nature of solvents
employed (i.e. methanol, ether petroleum, hexane), could
be further investigated; however, the fatty acid profile in
sesame products, particularly seeds may also be affected by
a range of inherent factors and evolutionary adaptations to
environmental conditions, including water stress, climatic
variations and growing conditions (51–54).’ Please refer to
pages 175 and 176, line 32-33 and 1-17.
Indeed, cConducting a series of further studies to investigate
the impact of different water deficit regimes when growing
the crop would be beneficial to maximise phytochemical
content in the seed and other processed fractions. This
would also help to understand water stress responses,
enhance the water use efficiency, identify varieties better
adapted to water deficit, assess the impact on processed
fractions, promote environmental sustainability, and provide
practical insights for farmers and different industries. Please
regimes not just WD and WW
when growing the crop to
maximise phytochemical
content in the seed and other
processed fractions
Page 195, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.7
Recommendations.
Line 15:
poor expression
Line 16:
poor expression, unclear
intention, re-write
Page 195, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.7
Recommendations. Line 25:
why was this not attempted
Page 196, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.8
Conclusions.
Line 18:
please suggest which ones
Line 24:
and higher TP and AO should
be mentioned
Line 24:
you said WW resulted in
higher MUFA and PUFA and
lower SFA levels be more
specific
refer to page 176 and 177, line 29-33 and 1-2.
The paragraph has been amended as follows: ‘The
observations provided from this investigation suggest a
series of parameters that require further consideration, for
continuous improvement. Modifications within the
analytical protocols include the choice of suitable solvents,
the adjustment of sample size, and the conditioning of
samples during the sample preparation. These parameters
may not only enhance the bioactive content but the overall
efficiency and accuracy of the analytical process.’.
Please refer to pages 176, lines 23-28, respectively.
Attempts to reprocess residual material in the rotational
screw and screw barrel using commercial samples were
unsuccessful. Seed sample's architecture and pressing
machine design limit the needed friction to extract oil. The
pressing machine failed to process the remaining material,
leading to a more compact mass. The questioned section
was removed, as it may create confusion and give the wrong
impression about unattempted trials.
The suggestions given by the reviewer have been adapted to
the following paragraph: ‘Varieties 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 and 12,
recorded the most representative TPC values. Regarding the
total antioxidant activity, varieties 1, 4, 7, and 12 could not
tolerate water deficit as per their recorded increased FRAP
values. Meanwhile, varieties 7, 10, 12, 13, and 18
demonstrated the highest CUPRAC values, with no
significant variations between the irrigation regimes applied
in field trials. Moreover, varieties 1, 2, 5, and 8 recorded
higher lignan contents (sesamin and sesamolin) and were
better adapted to the deficit irrigation regime. Particularly,
variety 10 had also higher sesamolin content between the
two irrigation levels. Furthermore, varieties 2, 4, 5, 8 and 18
ensured optimal health benefits due to lower ω-6/ω-3 PUFA
ratio.’in to the thesis.
Please refer to pages 178, line 4-13.
TPC, total antioxidant activity, together with lignans and
fatty acid composition have been incorporated, as follows:
‘Last but not least, water stress can indeed be used as a
strategic technique to enhance the TPC levels, the
antioxidant activity content and the bioactive content
characterised by richer lignan content in sesame. The same
approach can be implemented while maintaining a lower ω-
 6/ω-3 PUFA ratio.’
Please refer toon page 178, line 15-19.

Higher levels of UFA and lower levels of SFA reported by

previous studies (29–31) may promote optimal health
benefits: ‘The same approach can be implemented while
maintaining a lower ω-6/ω-3 PUFA ratio.’
Please refer to page 178, line 18-19.

Reviewer No 2
Page no & comment as per the
examiner’s report or marked up thesis
Page 26, Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.2
Aims and scope of the research. Line 12
Suggested revision '... novel food and
therapeutic products.'
Page 26, Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.2
Aims and scope of the research. Line 31
Please revise question 4 because you
can not have degree of saturation.
Does this work?
What is the effect of genotype on fatty
acid composition and fatty acid
saturation/ unsaturation ratios?
Page 27, Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.2
Aims and scope of the research. Line 10
Should this be 'Benchtop
spectrophotometric
methods/techniques such as total
phenolic content, ......'
Page 27, Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.2
Aims and scope of the research. Line 26
This needs some revision. What does
'broad classes of bioactive analytes'
mean? Also, I don't think TPC, FRAp,
CUPRAC are analytes, rather the assays
or techniques analysis. the analyte will
be the compounds in the sesame
products.
Response to the Reviewer*
The section denoted ‘sesame as a prominent
source for
developing novel food products or
medicinal/pharmaceutical applications’ was out of
the scope of this work. Hence, this section has
been amended. as follows: ‘In this context, the
essential focus is to identify and quantify these
compounds, aiming to select the varieties most
suited for commercial production in northern
Australian growing conditions.’
Please refer to page 25, line 30-32.
Research question denoted as 4 has now been
amended as per the reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 26, lines 18-19.
The section ‘Spectrophotometric techniques
including laboratory benchtop methods. The
protocols included colorimetric techniques’ has
been amended as ‘Benchtop spectrophotometric
techniques such as total phenolic content…’.
Please refer to page 26, line 27.
The aim 3 denoted has been amended as per the
reviewer’s suggestion as follows: ‘The third aim
was to investigate the correlations between the
antioxidant compounds measured by TPC, FRAP,
and CUPRAC, together with the individual lignans
(sesamin and sesamolin), and their relationship
with fatty acids in selected sesame genotypes.’
Please refer to page 27, lines 11-13.
Page 28, Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.2
Aims and scope of the research. Line 1
Having read the entire document; How
does aim #4 differ from aim #2? They
seem to be the same or
complimentary.
Please review. Thanks
Page 29, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.1 Overview. Line 14
Please add a reference for this.
Page 29, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.1 Overview. Line 14
The definition of antioxidants is
broader than this - it is not only within
biological systems but to any intended
applications.
...which have been widely investigated
for their critical role in preventing .....
Again, add references.
Line 21
Again add references.
The aim 4 has been amended to distinctly
differentiate it from aim 2, as follows:
“The fourth and final aim was to compare the
levels of the key bioactive compounds present in
Australian-grown black sesame with light-colour
sesame and dark-colour sesame obtained from
commercial sources”
Please refer to page 27, lines 15-17.
An appropriate reference has been incorporated
on page 29, line 11.
This reference can be found online as follows:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
337603350_Agronomic_Crops_Volume_1_Producti
on_Technologies_Volume_1_Production_Technolo
gies
The definitions of antioxidants have been extended
in this
section: ‘Antioxidants, a class of bioactive
compounds, are substances with functional
activities that decrease or prevent the oxidative
reactions in materials susceptible to oxidation (44).
These bioactive constituents have been widely
investigated for their critical role in preventing
numerous health-related issues.’
Reference:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
B9781782420897000014
Please refer to page 29, line 11-14.
The additional references have been added
Cardiovascular health:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
B9781782420897000014
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
PMC47258/
Anticancer properties:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33189842/
Anti-inflammatory effects:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5
297730/
Brain health:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0924224420306385#:~:text=Various
%20epidemiological%20studies%20demonstrated
 %20a,et%20al.%2C%202020).
Please refer to page 29, line 17-19.
Page 30, Chapter 2. Literature Review. The section ‘Residual waste of sesame’ has been
2.1 Overview. amended as ‘By-products of sesame’. Please refer
Line 9: to page 30, lines 11.
Please revise this. The
pressed cake from ‘Waste generation’ has been removed. Amended
sesame processing is as follows: ‘However, the complex nature of the
considered a by- numerous types of antioxidant compounds in
product than a waste. natural matrix has made their quantification a
Sludge may be a waste challenging task. Multiple analytical techniques are
but not the cake. available for use, each of which carries its own
Line 22 distinct limitations. Therefore, the information
Something is wrong, this does not read given in this review could contribute to the
well. How is waste generation a understanding of the potential uses of sesame and
challenge? How much waste is its derived by-products, serving as a strong
generated? platform for future research in this area.’
It might need rewriting. Please refer to page 30, lines 24-29.

Line 30 The section has been amended as per the

Something is not right in the statement. reviewer’s suggestion.
There are mismatching ideas. It reads Please refer to page 30, lines 32-33.
that oxidation compounds interact with
free radicals - which is not what is
meant.
Maybe 'Functional compounds in foods
have received great attention because
they may interact with free ........'
Page 31, Chapter 2. Literature Review. The figure caption (Figure 2-1) has been amended
2.2 The rise of health benefits. as per the reviewer’s suggestion..
Line 13 Please refer to page 31, line 19.
The caption does not fit the figure,
please revise. I am not sure where the While the chain reaction of lipids is well known, the
lipid content comes from. Also, there paragraph provides a helpful explanation for those
no food in figure. Please check. without a chemistry background. Hence, no further
Consider: "Simplified schematic amendments were implemented.
representation of lipid autooxidation Please refer to page 31, line 21.
mechanism'

Line 16:
Do you need this whole paragraph? The
chain reaction of lipids is well known
and I think the figure does illustrate the
idea really well. So you
could remove the narrative about the
figure.
Page 32, Chapter 2. Literature Review. The section ‘influence of water availability on the
2.2 The rise of health benefits.
Line 16
Please complete this final statement by
clarifying the point about water
availability. Is this referring to water
availability during plant growth? It is
not clear.
Line 17
Because you consider chemistry of
antioxidants, should the figure 2-1 and
it's discussion come here?
Also, consider providing examples of
the natural antioxidants as you did for
the synthetic ones.
Page 35, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.5 Typical levels of key biochemical
composition and uses of sesame. Line
29
Are these values correct?
Page 36, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.5 Typical levels of key biochemical
composition and uses of sesame. Line 4
Does this statement repeat Figure 2-3?
Page 37, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.5 Typical levels of key biochemical
composition and uses of sesame.
Line 19
What was the purpose for these two
statements? Are the required?
Page 38, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.5 Typical levels of key biochemical
composition and uses of sesame. Line 4
Is the figure about import or demand?
Page 40, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 2
Structurally, are phytosterols and fatty
acids polyphenolic compounds? Can
levels of these essential metabolites’ in the
previous thesis version was a bit vague, and
therefore, has been removed. Synthetic and
natural antioxidants have been introduced instead.
Please refer to page 32, line 23.
In addition, the ‘water availability’ was referring to
‘moisture availability during plant growing season’.
Please refer to page 34, line 5-6.
The Figure 2-1 and its discussion have been
relocated on page 31 and 32, line 15-22 and 1-13.
In addition, examples of natural antioxidants have
been incorporated in Figure 2-3, on page 34, line 1.
The MUFA and PUFA values have been amended to
ensure accurate data.
Please refer to page 36, lines 26-27.
The statement on page 36, line 4, does not repeat
Figure 2-3; it expands the health benefits of
sesame reported by previous studies and provides
further details about traditional uses and other
applications in different food products. No further
amendments were implemented.
The purpose of the two statements on page 37
(between lines 11 and 20) in the previous thesis
version, served the crucial purpose of providing a
justification and an in-depth explanation for the
gap identified within the existing literature. As a
result, no additional amendments were conducted.
The Figure 2-4 in the previous thesis version refers
to ‘demand’ for sesame in Australia. This figure is
now denoted as Figure 2-5. The reference to Figure
2-5 from the section discussing ‘importing sesame’
has been removed to where it is talking about
‘demand’.
Please refer to page 39, line 10.
The specific section has been amended, by
removing phytosterols, carotenoids, phytates and
fatty acids on page 41, line 2.
you check this.
Page 42, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 7
What were the results? That is needed
to complete this idea.
Page 43, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 1
Table 2-1: Title: Maybe revise to:
"Lignan content reported in sesame
products worldwide.'
Also, the table can be better organised
to group seeds and oils products.
Also, under variety/colour - there is
fourteen and sixty-five varieties which
seem odd.
Page 43, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 10
Maybe so. However, considering these
studies are done differently in different
locations and on different seeds and oil
products - don't you think that will
drive the main differences than solvent
type and methodological differences?
Line 19
If the Bhatnagar et al. recommends a
hexane-chloroform mix - how does that
disagree with the others? They are only
stating the outcome of their
investigation.
Page 44, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 4
Who finding? If it's connected to ref
143, I think you need to make this
clearer.
The results obtained in the study conducted by
Moazzami et al. (2006) in Texas were incorporated,
as per the reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 42, line 15-17.
The Table 2-1 has been changed as per the
reviewer’s suggestion. The table was tidied by
grouping seeds and oils. The number of samples
was removed where needed and seed
variety/colour has been incorporated.
All the above amendments have been reflected on
page 44, line 15.
‘Sesame genotypes’ and ‘growing locations’ have
been included in the discussion of the literature. In
addition, the ‘Method of extraction’ column has
been incorporated in Table 2-1, to facilitate the
discussion.
Please refer to pages 44, lines 1-4.
The following paragraph has been
incorporatedBhatnagar et al. recommendation
reference has been clarified on into page 45, line
8-17, to clarify the initial argument: “Bhatnagar et
al. (55) presented a contrasting argument by
questioning that repeated extraction steps are
needed for the extraction of lignan content, as
reported by Andargie et al. (82) and Kamal-Edin &
Appelqvist (150). This Indian report proposed an
alternative, which involved the use of a
combination of n-hexane-chloroform as a universal
solvent for lignan extraction, thus aiming to
optimise the efficiency of the extraction process,
instead.”.
The section has been amended for further
clarification. as follows: ‘In a recent investigation
(56), methanol, ethanol, acetone and ethyl acetate,
were tested for their ability to recover key lignans
(sesamin and sesamolin) and other minor lignans,
and using acid hydrolysis in combination with four

Line 7
Why is this important? This has been
stated already and shown in Table 2-1.
Maybe delete.
Line 11
Please provide references for this
statement. Importantly, maybe place
this statement in the first paragraph
where you talk about the health
benefits of sesame.
Page 44, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 16
Should this be composition of sesame
FA? It reads a bit generic.
Also, what does composition of fatty
acid mean? Fatty acids are basically
carbon chain. Should it be
triglycerides?
Line 28
Do you mean the fatty acids in sesame
oil has anti-depressive and constipation
properties? How so? Usually, the oil
contains other bioactive compounds -
are these functions due to the oil or
minor components? What is the
relationship between sesame oil and
constipation function?
Page 45, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids:
the key bioactive
compounds in sesame. Line 12
Are these relevant to the current topic
discussion. These are well known ‘Spatial arrangement’ has been adopted in the
information. Consider focusing on respective section. Please refer to page 46, lines
sesame as alpha-linolenic is a minor 11-12.
PUFA; Also, are EPA and DHA relevant
to sesame?
heating treatments (infrared, autoclaving,
microwaving, water bath). According to their
findings, methanol was the most optimum solvent
for lignan recovery, followed by ethanol, acetone,
and ethyl acetate.’
Please refer to page 45, line 23-28.
The statement has been relocated to page 38 (lines
5), as the initial idea was associated with lignans
present in sesame seeds and oils, in combination
with their health benefits.
The reference has been already incorporated into
the statement. In addition, this statement has been
also relocated to page 38, lines 5-8, a per the
reviewer’s suggestion.
The section ‘composition of FA’ has been amended
as per the reviewer’s suggestion. Please refer to
page 45, line 5.
‘Composition of fatty acid’ referred to the ‘typical
levels’ investigated in other studies.
Triglycerides was an irrelevant topic in this work.
Thus, no further amendments were implemented.
The ‘anti-depressive effects’ or the use for
‘constipation treatment’ are still areas of ongoing
research. The uses of sesame oil (Figure 2-9) were
merely informative reported by previous studies.
Traditional use of sesame oil (i.e. as a mild laxative,
and lubricating properties) generally promotes
regular bowel movements (57). Therefore, it is
unclear if these biological functions are directly
associated with fatty acids. In consequence, the
section ‘together with other bioactive compounds’,
has been incorporated in the statement prior
Figure 2-9.
Please refer to page 45, lines 5.
The only relevant fatty acids for the topic
discussion are ‘ω-3 PUFA’ and ‘ω-6 PUFA’. The
other mentioned fatty acids were removed. Please
refer to page 46, lines 5-6.
Line 14
Please correct this - cis and trans are
geometric isomers - more of a
structural characterization than
unsaturation classification. Cis and
trans does not inform of unsaturation
but spatial arrangement.
Page 46, Chapter 2. Literature Review. The section referring to 'sesame products’ has
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids: been removed, as per the reviewer’s suggestion.
the key bioactive Please refer to page 47, line 6.
compounds in sesame.
Line 13
This is not clear - the section is about
fatty acids - how is this linked to
sesame products? Do you mean the oils
in sesame products?
Maybe delete as it does not impact the
meaning.
Page 47, Chapter 2. Literature Review. ‘the nutritional composition’ has been amended as
2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids: ‘bioactive content levels in different crops’ to clarify
the key bioactive the section. Please refer to page 48, line 7-8.
compounds in sesame. Line 8
This is a bit vague - nutritional The respective paragraph has been slighly modified
composition of what? to ensure a review of the literature rather than
stating an objective, as follows: ‘Hence, the
Line 24 exploration of various irrigation levels on the
Is this required? This section should be variation in fatty acid composition, phenolic
a review of the literature than stating content and lignan profile among various sesame
of objective. genotypes could contribute to the knowledge
necessary for large-scale cultivation of black
sesame in northern Australia.’.
Please refer to page 48, line 17-20.

Page 48, Chapter 2. Literature Review. Amended as follows: “A recent comprehensive

2.6 Phenolics, lignans and fatty Acids: review, described the most common methods used
the key bioactive for the estimation of lignans in sesame. These
compounds in sesame. methods comprised specifically the use of various
sample extraction methods and different solvents
Line 2 for sesame lignan profiling (4).” Please refer toon
This statement is a bit convoluted - page 48, lines 28-31.
rewrite it.
Amended and incorporated on page 49, between
Line 10 lines 1-5: “One more challenge is the use of
Check this statement, it is a bit unclear. different analytical techniques, which can present
inconsistent results, different conversion units, and
Line 18 different standard reference solutions on each of
What does this mean?
Line 20
Is nutritional compounds the same as
bioactive compounds?
Are the bioactive compounds
therapeutic or nutritional agents?
Page 51, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.8 Methods for the edible oil
extraction. Line 9
This statement is unclear.
Page 51, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.8 Methods for the edible oil
extraction. Line 21
Are you considering the extraction
from a laboratory or industrial
perspective
Page 51, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.8 Methods for the edible oil
extraction. Line 24
Note that hot pressing is also a type of
mechanical pressing. There are two
forms of mechanical pressing - cold and
hot pressing. In most
commercial processes, mechanical
pressing precedes solvent extraction?
Page 52, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.8 Methods for the edible oil
extraction. Line 1
Maybe clarify or specify is these
methods a laboratory or industrial
based.
Page 56, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.8 Methods for the edible oil
extraction. Line 21
You seem to have covered aspects in
the previous section, so why a separate
section?
the assays. These factors collectively contribute to
inconsistencies and make it difficult to achieve
comparable results (4,58).”
The second last statement is meaningless. Thus, it
has been removed.
Please refer to page 49, lines 12.
Nutritional compounds differ from bioactive
compounds. Bioactive compounds are therapeutic
agents. Thus, ‘nutritional compounds’ has been
amended as ‘bioactive compounds’ along the
whole thesis.
Please refer to page 49, line 13-14.
Amended as follows: ‘A possible explanation is the
use of organic solvents. Solvent polarity influences
the selectivity and solubility of the extracted
bioactive compounds (59,60).’ Please refer toon
page 52, line 10-12.
The oil processing was more considered from an
eco-friendly perspective. Hence, no further
amendments were performed in this section.
The given comment was revised. Cold pressing
technique was a suitable approach for the current
work. Solvent extraction was discarded to preserve
the natural properties of the final outcome. No
further amendments were performed in this
section.
A superscript has been added to each of the
extraction methods on Table 2-4, to distinguish
whether the method is industrial or laboratory
based. Please refer to pages 53-56.
The topics discussed in section ‘2.8.1 Alternative
techniques to decrease the use of organic solvents’
were covered in previous sections. Thus, the
section has been removed.
Please refer to page 58, line 20.
The given justification about CQUniversity screw
Line 33
I am not sure about this section
onwards. This is literature review,
hence, there is no need to provide
justification about CQUniversity screw
press.
At best cover that under the methods.
You can delete it and it won't affect the
meaning of your message.
Page 57, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.9 Sesame derived by-products from
the oil processing. Line 12
From process perspective, won't the
sludge be waste stream than by-
product?
Consider an appropriate terminology.
Line 17
With sesame as the focus, these should
be about sesame than general oilseeds.
Page 58, Chapter 2. Literature Review.
2.9 Sesame derived by-products from
the oil processing.
Line 6
Do you mean animal feed?
Line 14
Canola and rapeseed may mean the
same thing.
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.1. Overview. Line 1
Maybe 'activity'
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
Methods. Line 22
Should you use water than moisture?
Page 60, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
Methods. Line 24
Why ETC for evapotranspiration
demand?
Page 61, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
press in section 2.8.1 has been removed.
Please refer to page 57, line 32.
While the reviewer's suggestion was revised,
sesame sludge was defined as a by-product based
on its generation during the centrifuging step. This
aspect has been further elaborated on page 58,
lines 4-10, as per the first reviewer’s suggestion.
‘oilseed plants’ has been amended as ‘sesame’
only.
Please refer to pages 58, line 16.
‘animal fertiliser’ been amended as ‘animal feed’.
Please refer to page 58, line 16.
The reference used in this work distinguished
various oil samples. Amongst others, canola and
rapeseed, separately.
No further amendments were performed.
Reference:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33992331/
The ‘Chapter 3’ title 'Bioactive potential of
Australian-grown sesame seed’ had no
amendments.
The moisture concept was adopted from the
previous investigation conducted by Timilsina
(2021). Hence, no further amendments were
performed.
‘Evapotranspiration demand (ETC)’ has been
amended as ‘crop evapotranspiration demand
(ETc)’, as per previous investigation Timilsina
(2021). Please refer to page 61, line 24.
The standard procedure used in this study was
following protocols developed at CQU’s laboratory
(Johnson, Collins, Skylas, & Naiker, 2019). Sample
Methods.
Line 14
For analytical purposes, won't cold or
refrigerated storage be more
appropriate?
Page 62, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown sesame seed.
3.2 Materials and Methods. Line 5
What does this mean? Does this mean,
three seed samples were ground to
obtain the 3 g?
Page 63, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
Methods. Line 4
Was the absorbance reading an
endpoint reading or in a scan mode? In
the appendix, you have "The linear
regression equations were carried out
by plotting the peak areas against the
injected amounts of standard
compounds. The linearity was
demonstrated by coefficient of
determination (R2). The limits of
detection (LOD) and the limits of
quantification (LOQ) were determined
based on the signal-to-noise ratio (S:N)
of approximately 3:1 and 10:1,
respectively." Does this apply? Does
injection and peak area apply?
Page 64, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
Methods. Line 5
Consider stating the actual test and not
the analysis method. State what you
are analysing. In this case,
Determination of lignans.
Line 24
Will this work? "Preparation of Fatty
Acid Methyl Ester (FAME) from sesame
seed"
processing was conducted by preparing methanolic
extracts and appropriate storing at 4 °C until
required. Small portions of ground sesame
leftovers were kept in sterile polystyrene water
sample screw cap containers (Thermoline
Australia) in darkness at room temperature if
further required.
Reference has been incorporated on page 64, line
12-14.
This means no duplicates were performed for the
moisture content analysis. Only one sample from
each field replicate wsa used. No further
amendments were implemented.
The section in Appendix A was incorrect. This
section was amended as follows: ‘The absorbance
reading was an end point detection for TPC, FRAP,
CUPRAC and HPLC –DAD. This is due to UV-Vis
would detect specific wavelength, which were
followed by the references of each of the protocols
employed in previous studies.’
Only GC-MS was carried out on scan mode. Please
refer to Appendix E.
The section has been amended as: ‘Determination
of lignans in sesame seeds using HPLC analysis’.
Please refer to page 66, line 18-19.
The respective section has been amended as per
the reviewer’s suggestion. Please refer to page 67,
line 5.
Page 65, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
Methods. Line 3
Centrifugal unit was reported as 'g' in
section 3.2.6, but 'rpm' here. These are
different conversion units - please
amend.
Page 66, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.2 Materials and
Methods. Line 3
Please specify: "Were these individual
standards of each fatty acid or the
FAME Mix?
Page 69, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 16
Considering there was no roasting
treatment in your study, is it
appropriate to compare your samples
of these Egyptian samples?
Page 70, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 3
Another implication of moisture
content is during processing e.g. oil
pressing/extraction from seeds. Too
low or too high impacts oil extraction
yield.
3.4 Results and Discussion. Line 10
Under treatments, what does IUPAC
stand for? Is that a treatment method?
Considering most of the samples have
been pretreated by some means -
roasting/soaking etc, do you consider
the current comparison to your work
justified?
Do you even need this table?
Centrifugal units were all measured as ‘g’ in this
work.
Please refer to page 67, line 17.
The FAME Mix. No further amendments were
incorporated in this section.
The reviewer is correct; however, the study also
reported the average moisture content using
control samples (with no roasting treatment),
which were the values used for comparison
purposes in this work. Hence, no amendments
were implemented in this section.
The highlighted section by the reviewer has been
amended as follows: ‘Another implication of
moisture content supported by previous reports
(61), is during the seed processing and sample
storing prior to oil extraction. Higher moisture
content in the seeds may impact oil extraction
yield. In addition, the final product could be more
susceptible to mould growth and microbial
development (62), if moisture content increases.
Therefore, determining appropriate storage
conditions while achieving desired oil content
levels could ensure the final product is both safe
and of good quality.’
Please refer to pages 73 and 74, lines 20-23 and 1-
2.
IUPAC stands for International Union of Pure and
Applied Chemistry. The IUPAC 1.121 is a standard
method. It estimates of moisture content from
oil/fat samples using air-oven drying. This does not
refer to a treatment method.
Pre-treatment methods (i.e. roasting, soaking,

Page 73, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 12
Should PBAgrifood samples be labeled
as samples than variety? Seeds from
commercial sources could be
aggregates of several varieties than a
single one. Do you know if those
samples are single varieties? Also, be
midful of the comparison being made
here. 146.68 is the average of 11
samples but then you compare that
with the a single commercial
source. May be add 'average of the TPC
of the 11-research sesame samples'
Also, considering the AF samples were
dehulled, were the samples used in the
current study dehulled? What effect
does than have on the TPC?
Page 74, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion
Line 12
Add sesame in the title. Also, add the
microwaving) were no parameters of comparison
for the current study. Table 3-3 has been now
relocated to Appendix F and is denoted as Table 3-
2.
The reviewer is correct. PBAgrifood samples
labelled as ‘variety’ should be ‘sample’ instead.
Hence, these amendments have been reflected
across the entire thesis, particularly on page 74,
lines 18 and 20.
Further information about commercially sourced
samples was unavailable. Only the details given in
the 'Sample material' section were accessible.
Additionally, the suggestion ‘average of the TPC of
the 11-research sesame samples’ has been adopted
across the entire thesis, particularly on page 73,
line 17.
Field-grown samples were whole seeds, and AF
samples were dehulled material. Hence, the
following paragraph has been incorporated as part
of the analysis: ‘Particularly, varieties 1, 5 and 8
resulted with the highest average TPC. The
differences observed across all samples could be
due to genetic features (10,22,23). Please refer to
page 74, line 4-5.
Field-grown samples were not dehulled in the
current study. Previous studies conducted on
whole white and black sesame extracts together
with hull extracts seem to influence the TPC values,
with lower values in the whole seeds than hull
extracts (63). The authors of this previous
investigation also claimed a higher TPC in black
hulls than white materials. The results from the
current study agree with Shahidi et al (63). Hence,
after analysing all the facts mentioned above, it can
be postulated that black sesame hulls could
provide potential health benefits.
Please refer to page 75, line 6-13, in which this
information mentioned above has been
incorporated.
Table 3-6 is now denoted as Table 3-3 and
relocated to Appendix F. The section ‘for sesame
samples’ has been incorporated in title caption.
The unit of measurement was also reported in
GAE/100 g DW in other studies. Observations from
previous studies were incorporated into this table.
unit of measurement. Were there also
in GAE/ 100 g DW?
Consider the presentation style. Is this
table needed if you restate all the data
in the next paragraph? Ideally, the
table should communicate everything
in the next paragraph. Rather than
rewriting the table in another
paragraph, you may add a 4th column
as a comment column – the state your
observation.
Page 75, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
Significantly, suggests that you
performed some form of ANOVA
between your samples and the other
studies, was this the case? If not
remove significantly.
Line 7
It is Tunisia in Table 3-6. Is this correct?
Page 76, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 17
Why does the plant produce more
secondary metabolites in response to
the stress? What metabolic pathways
are activated or switch on in response
to water stress leading greater
accumulation of physicochemicals?
Page 77, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 9
Do the superscripts in the table show
vertical separations in the mean
(variety) or horizontal separation in the
mean (irrigation treatment), especially
when using a one-way ANOVA?
‘significantly’ has been removed from page 75, line
4.
‘Sudan’ has been amended as ‘Tunisia’ as per the
article:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs
/pii/S0308814606007205.
Please refer to page 75, line 5.
The plant produces more secondary metabolites in
response to different type of stress (16).
Specifically, the phenylpropanoid biosynthetic
pathway is typically triggered in the presence of
abiotic stress, such as water deficit (17). This
activation leads to the accumulation of diverse
bioactive compounds, crucial for the plant's
adaptive strategy. These bioactive compounds play
a pivotal role in by scavenging harmful reactive
oxygen species (ROS), serving as an evolutionary
defence mechanism to safeguard the plant from
the adverse environmental conditions (17,28).
This information has now been incorporated on
page 76, line 3-10.
The superscripts in the table 3-7, show horizontal
separation in the average (irrigation treatment).
A two-way ANOVA was employed to analyse both,
the effect of variety and the effect of irrigation
treatment, in the levels of antioxidant activity
estimated by FRAP assay, as well as the interaction
between the two factors (variety * irrigation
treatment). As the ANOVA results indicated
significant statistically differences, Tukey’s test was
When is a one ANOVA used and when
is a two-way ANOVA used?
Page 78, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Repetition of data in Table 3-7.
Page 78, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 13
The same results in Table 3-8 and
Figure 3-6. Hence, you mention Table
3-8 but only discusses Figure 3-6.
Note that this comparison is based on
your study average, hence it is
important to state that some individual
varieties had higher FRAP than some
of the commercial samples.
Line 20
Should this be a sample or variety?
employed for multiple comparisons to identify
which irrigation treatment and varieties differed
from each other.
Please refer to page 77, lines 18-32, which reflect
the differences found amongst varieties and
irrigation treatments in the levels of the
antioxidant activity evaluated by FRAP assay using
field grown samples.
The reviewer is correct. The Table 3-7 and Figure 3-
5 represented a duplication of data in the previous
thesis version. Hence, this data set has been
relocated to Appendix F. In the new version, it
corresponds to Table 3-5.
Correct. The Table 3-8 and Figure 3-6 represented
a duplication of data. Hence, the dataset of Table
3-8 was incorporated into Table 3-5 (field-grown
samples) and relocated in Appendix F. This table is
now denoted as Table 3-5.
A clarification regarding the comparison based on
the study average was noted. Some individual
field-grown varieties exhibited higher FRAP values
than some of the commercial samples. Thus, this
point has been incorporated as followsin Figure 3-
7.:
‘Figure 3-7 reflects the average FRAP content
found in commercially sourced sesame samples
together with field-grown samples. As it can be
seen in Figure 3-7, the average FRAP content
estimated for the 11-research samples was also
somewhat comparable, with higher values under
the WD treatment (130.72 ± 45.67 mg TE/100g
DW) than the values obtained in samples
CWS (123.23 ± 6.21 mg TE/100g DW), AF-V6821
(123.21 ± 2.43 mg TE/100g DW), and AF-V6832
(84.35 ± 2.06 mg TE/100g DW). Specifically, just
two field-grown samples (varieties 4 and 7) had
comparable values, with higher values (193.32 ±
12.62 and 195.22 ± 9.63 mg TE/100g DW,
respectively) in the WD treatment than the light-
coloured samples procured from commercial
sources (CWS, AF-V6821 and AF-V6832).’
Please refer to pages 77 and 78, line 12-21.
“Variety has been amended as ‘Sample’
Please refer to page 77, line 22.
Page 79, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 13
Repeats data in previous table, notes
are the same.
Line 12
Shouldn't this be simple sample
differences than groups? Or what are
the groups?
There is no 'b' or 'c'. How are the letters AF-V6832 represent white dehulled sesame
applied?
Page 80, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 14
Again consider earlier comment. Do not
provide a summary table then write the
entire table in another paragraph.
Decide between the two which you
prefer. Other, it's only a repetition.
Line 19
You already stated that the data
are/were comparable so why this?
Noting that, some of your varieties had
high FRAP values and others lower than
these other studies.
The addition of HCL is intended to help
release bound phenolic which in
essence should increase the FRAP. But
a key variance to your study is the
variety and the different samples. Also,
what is evident is the actual profile of
Datasets recorded in Table 3-8 and Table 3-7 have
been integrated. This table is now denoted as
Table 3-5 and has been relocated to Appendix F.
Table note has been amended as follows: ‘ANOVA
test based on FRAP data (p < 0.05). Tukey's HSD
mean separation was used to distinguish between
different varieties and two different irrigation
treatments. Values with the same lowercase letter
within a column and between columns are not
significantly different, p<0.05. Abbreviations: WD,
water-deficient; WW, well-watered irrigation
treatments applied in the field trials; AF-V6821 and
samples provided by PBAgrifood; CWS, commercial
white sesame; CBS, commercial black sesame.’.
Figure note (3-7) has been amended as follows:
‘distinct two’ changed as ‘distinguish between
different varieties and two different irrigation
treatments’. The section ‘Values with the same
lowercase letter on the bars are not significantly
different, p<0.05.’has been incorporated.
Lowercase letters in the previous thesis version
have been now amended in this Figure.
Please refer to page 78, line 7-11, which reflects
these amendments.
The Table 3-9 has been relocated to Appendix F
and is now denoted as Table 3-6, to avoid
duplication of data in both, main text, and tables.
The reviewer is correct. The highlighted section by
the reviewer in the previous examined thesis
version was incorrect. Genetic differences and
modifications conducted in the sample preparation
method could influence the obtained results
amongst different studies.
This information has been incorporated on page
79, line 19-20.
The reviewer’s suggestion has been incorporated
on page 80, line 1-3.
The terminology ‘oxidation stability’ has been
amended as ‘the antioxidant activity’.
Please refer to page 80, line 5-6.
the phenolic compounds as some
compounds have limited antioxidant
capacity.
Line 23
Something is amiss with this sentence.
Simple explanation - type, diversity and
concentration of different polyphenolic
compounds making up the different
extracts.
Line 30
Why this point? Oxidation stability of
what?
Page 81, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 3
Note that, based on your results, the
well irrigated varieties also had high
FRAP values.
Line 8
How so? Water stress impacted the
phenolic acid content more than the
FRAP. That said, both irrigation
treatments had high FRAP values. It will
be good to know the actual phenolic
composition of the samples. Also, there
was a varietal difference. There seems
to be a water availability/
varietal interaction on FRAP.
Line 22
What is the relevance of the WD:WW
ratio? I ask because although they are
in the tables, they are not discussed or
mentioned.
The reviewer is correct. Overall, WW samples also
had high FRAP values. Moreover, the general
statement ‘higher antioxidant activity could be due
to insufficient water availability (76,88,212)’
reported in the previous thesis version is incorrect.
Therefore, appropriate explanations that support
the results obtained in this study have been
incorporated on page 80, line 7-24., as follows:
‘The findings from this study align with previous
efforts conducted by Kim et al. (9), which
suggested that the activity of potential antioxidant
compounds in sesame is affected by water
deficiency stress; however, the response to water
deficit differs depending on the sesame cultivars. In
line with other studies (9,10), the antioxidant
activity measured by FRAP was generally
dependent on the water stress level and sesame
genotype in this study. There seems to be an
interaction of genotype and irrigation regime,
which resulted in increased levels in some and
decreased in other genotypes under water deficit.
Therefore, it is postulated that the genotypes with
higher FRAP values in the WW treatment can be
categorised as sensitive to water stress, as
described in other studies (9,10). Previous efforts
have shown that plants generally produce more
phenolic, lignan, tocopherol and sterol contents
when subjected to environmental stress, disease,
or insect attack (24,25,64). Thus, the differences in
antioxidant activity observed in the different
sesame samples may be attributed to physiological
changes experienced by the plants as a defence
mechanism by enhancing the bioactive content.

Page 82, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 2
Did the ANOVA test also distinguish
varietal effect?
Line 8
Should 8 be 6?
Line 14
This seems to be a repeat of what you
have written in the previous sentences.
Also, Figure 3-7 has same data as Table
3-10.
Page 83, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 9
This does not read right. Please revise.
Line 13
Maybe keep this Figure and remove
Table 3-11.
However, it is important to consider that other
factors such as the diversity of sesame varieties
studied may also contribute to the variation in
antioxidant capacity, as postulated by previous
investigations (21,53,65,66).’
The suggestions given by the reviewer have been
taken into consideration. and appropriate
amendments have been implemented, as seen in
previous comment.
Please refer to page 80, line 7-24, which reflects
these amendments.
The reviewer is correct; however, FRAP dataset
summarised in Table (3-7) in the previous
examined thesis version has been relocated to
Appendix F and is now denoted as Table 3-5, for
further reference.
Yes, the ANOVA test was employed for multiple
comparisons between the two irrigation
treatments and different sesame samples. Hence,
the table note of CUPRAC dataset has been
amended accordingly.
Please refer to Appendix F, Table 3-7, which
includes this amendment.
The lowest CUPRAC value in the previous thesis
version was incorrect. Hence, this value has been
corrected on page 80, line 34.
The reviewer is correct. The highlighted section by
the reviewer in the previous thesis version was
incorrect. Hence, this section has been removed on
page 81, line 6.
Additionally, Table 3-10 in the previous thesis
version has been relocated to Appendix F and is
now denoted as Table 3-7 to avoid duplication of
data.
The questioned section has been amended as:
‘Samples CBS and CWS had the highest average
antioxidant activity estimated by CUPRAC assay
amongst all sesame samples tested, with values of
23450.22 ± 614.17 and 11738.14 ± 116.26 mg
TE/100 g of DW, respectively.’
Please refer to page 81, line 2-5.
The Table 3-11 has been relocated to Appendix F

Page 83, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 17
How does these processes increase the
CUPRAC value? The other samples
were cleaned and dried and their
moisture content were generally in ball
pack. Were the CWS and CBS samples
debulled?
Considering the TPC of CBS and CWS
were within the range of the others,
won't the possible reason be the
distribution and composition of
individual phytochemicals in the
samples and their sensitivity to the
CUPRAC assay than the type of
processing?
Page 85, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
There is no evidence from the current
study supporting this statement,
considering you did not test the effect
of 'manufacturing processes'.
Line 7
I don't think you should give a
conclusion here as the chapter is not
done.
Line 11
Consider a more suitable title for the
section.
Line 17
Do you need this?
Page 86, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
and is now denoted as Table 3-7 due to being
integrated into Table 3-10.
Figure 3-7 is now denoted as 3-8.
The section referring to manufacuring processes
(wet dehulling, cleaning and drying) has been
removed due to all samples tested in this work
were treated under the same conditions (i.e.
cleaning, drying, and the respective phytochemical
analyses). The origin of CBS and CWS samples was
unspecified.
The section was amended as follows: ‘Additionally,
the TPC values of CBS (111.55 mg GAE/100 g DW)
and CWS (85.79 mg GAE/100 g DW) were within
the range (76.65 - 192.85 mg of GAE/100 g of DW)
of the other tested samples. Therefore, the
increase CUPRAC values, particularly in CWS and
CBS samples, could be attributed to the
distribution and composition of individual
phytochemicals in the samples and their sensitivity
to the CUPRAC assay (63).’
Please refer toon page 81, line 9-14.
The section referring to
manufacuringmanufacturing processes has been
removed. Comparisons between FRAP and
CUPRAC values reported in this study were
incorporated instead, as per the first reviewer’s
suggestion.
Please refer to page 82, line 1-13.
‘In conclusion’ has been amended as ‘Taking
together, the results of…’.Please refer to page 82,
line 14.
The section 3.4.3.4 has been amended as
‘Determination of lignans in sesame seeds using
HPLC analysis’.
Please refer to page 82, line 18.
The section referring to ‘Calibration curves,
regression
equations, and correlation coefficients (r2) and
other details’ has been removed, due to being no
longer necessary.
The ‘as can be seen by the ratios’ has been
amended as: ‘as can be seen in Figure 3-11’.
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 21
I don't think you need the ratio to see
that the WD are relatively higher than
the WW.
Page 87, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Which letters show varietal and
irrigation differences? It's difficult to
know.
Page 89, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 15
Rather than writing all these, just refer
to the table 3-13 or Figure 3-11.
Consider this for other sections.
Page 89, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 19
Were all the commercial samples
dehulled or roasted? This is not clear.
What about varietal effect?
Line 23
Why these, considering you did not
consider any of these in your
experimental design.
Page 91, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
The above table basically summarizes
everything in this paragraph. You are
only duplicating the information. Either
you go with the table or you
Please refer to page 84, line 1.
The table note has been amended as follows:
‘Tukey's HSD mean separation was used to
distinguish different varieties and two different
irrigation treatments.’ The Table 3-12 and 3-13
were integrated and relocated in Appendix F. This
table is now denoted as 3-8.
Please refer to Appendix F.
Table 3-11 is now denoted as Table 3-8. In
consequence, the highlighted section has been
amended as follows: ‘Varieties CWS (1.73 ± 0.18
mg/g of seed), CBS (1.68 ± 0.01 mg/g of seed), AF-
V6821 (1.59 ± 0.00 mg/g of seed), and AF-V6832
(1.46 ± 0.01 mg/g of seed).’
Please refer toon page 86, line 13-15 for further
reference.
Commercial samples, particularly AF-V6821 and
AF-V6832, were dehulled. CWS and CBS had limited
information.
The section ‘dehulling and roasting’ has been
removed. Varietal effect together with other
parameters are included in further details in the
next paragraph of the pointed section.
Please refer to pages 85 and 86, line 15-18 and line
8-23, respectively.
Correct, only physical features such as seed colour
and dehulling were considered in the experimental
design. Therefore, roasting has been removed from
the analysis and discussion on page 86, line 16-18.
The Table 3-14 in the previous thesis version has
been relocated to Appendix F and is now denoted
as Table 3-10, for further reference and to keep
sections more concise.
go with the paragraph.
Consider this for the other sections - it
will make the sections more concise.
Page 93, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 13
Same data as Table 3-15.
Page 95, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 6
This does not read well. Please revise.
Page 95, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 9
Again, these are the same dataset.
Page 95, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 20
What does this mean? It is a bit
unclear.
Page 96, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 2
There is no data/evidence on
manufacturing process, so why this
comment?
Line 4
Please revise this statement.
Line 10
The Table 3-15 in the previous thesis version has
been relocated to Appendix F and is now denoted
as Table 3-9, to avoid duplication of the data. Only
Figure 3-13 has been kept within the main text, as
reflected on page 88, line 10.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis version has been amended as
follows: ‘Only variety 7 had no remarkable
differences in the average sesamolin content
between the two irrigation treatments (WD and
WW), which values were 1.08 mg/g and 0.94 mg/g
of seed, respectively.’This has been revised in
response to reviewer 1 comment.
Please refer to page 87, lines 22-24.
The information in Table 3-16 (average sesamolin
content obtained from commercially sourced
samples) in the previous thesis version has been
integrated into Table 3-15 (average sesamolin
content recorded from field-grown samples). This
dataset has been relocated to Appendix F and is
now denoted as Table 3-9.
The highlighted section was rephrased and
amended for further clarification. as follows: ‘As
illustrated in Figure 3-14, these results were similar
(AF-V6832, 0.95 ± 0.01 mg/g of seed; CWS, 0.99 ±
0.01 mg/g of seed) in light-colour sesame from
commercial sources.’ Please refer to page 89, line
13-15.
The reviewer is correct. The section referring to
‘manufacturing processes’ has been removed.
Please refer to pages 89, line 21.
The statement highlighted was referring to
manufacturing processes. As previously discussed,
this statement has been removed.
Please refer to page 89, line 21.
The reviewer is correct. The Figure 3-14 merely
duplicates previous datasets. Hence, this Figure has
been removed. Please refer to page 89, line 21.
Further information about the detailed processes
Why this figure? It only repeat data in
previous tables and figures - it's
duplication. You should avoid that. You
can make the comment without this
additional figure.
Also, do you have much information
about the detailed processes applied to
the samples?
Page 98, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential
of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion.
Line 9
It was Dar et al. 2014 in Table 3-17.
To my earlier comment, this section
only repeats data in Table 3-17.
applied to commercially sourced samples was
inaccessible.
The reference ‘Dar et al. (2015)’ has been revised
and adapted to the Vancouver reference style.
Reflected on page 90, line 12.
The Table 3-17 was used as a reference. This table
has been relocated to Appendix F and is now
denoted as Table 3-10 . In this way, the highlighted
section only includes relevant evidence to support
the results obtained in this investigation.

Line 14 The Chinese investigation was not included in the

Why is this not in the table? Table 3-17. Hence, this has been now included as
‘Wang et al. (108)’ (Table 3-10). Please refer to
Line 20 Appendix F.
It is repeats Table 3-17
As Table 3-17 is now in Appendix F (Table 3-10),
therefore, the highlighted paragraph only includes
comparable values to support the results obtained
in this work.
Please refer to page 91, line 23.
Page 99, Chapter 3. Bioactive potential The reviewer is correct. Hence, the highlighted
of the Australian-grown section by the reviewer has been removed.
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and Please refer to page 92, line 3, which reflects this
Discussion. amendment.
Line 1
This is not the right place for a The reviewer is correct, and FAME were analysed
conclusion. in sesame samples. Therefore, the subtitle has
been amended as ‘FAME analysis by GC-MS in
Line 10 sesame seeds’.
Why FAME synthesis? Did you synthesis Please refer to page 92, line 15.
FAME or analysed FAME in the
samples?
Page 100, Chapter 3. Bioactive The x-axis label was incorrect in Figure 3-15, in the
potential of the Australian-grown previous thesis version. Hence, the figure has been
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and amended accordingly, by removing ‘Saturated fatty
Discussion. Line 1 acid’ and incorporating ‘Fatty acid’.
Why is 'saturated fatty acid' in the Please refer toon page 93, line 1.
figure?
Page 101, Chapter 3. Bioactive The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
potential of the Australian-grown previous thesis version, has been summarised as
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 2
Again, you might not need to repeat
the values in the Table. Basically, both
palmitic and stearic acids were reduced
under WD treatment compared to WW
treatment.
You can be more concise considering
the trend is same for both acids.
Page 101, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Rewrite/revise this for clarity.
Page 101, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 11
Please check these values to ensure
they match the correct fatty acid.
Page 101, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 22
Be explicit that 'irrigation had more
effect on the major SFAs than the
minor SFAs.
Page 102, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 1
Rather create a separate table for the
follows: ‘From the observed results, the average
palmitic and stearic acids were lower (13.34 ± 2.49
and 6.56 ± 1.1 (mg/g) in terms of seed) in the WD
treatment than in the WW treatment (15.11 ± 3.07
and 7.35 ± 1.25 mg/g of seed)’.
Please refer to page 93, lines 16-19, which reflects
this amendment.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis version has been amended.,
including the levels of variation of each SFA
together with F-values and significance, for further
clarity as follows:
‘Moreover, there were statistically significant
differences (two-way analysis of variance [ANOVA];
p < 0.05) in the levels of various SFA between
sesame varieties subjected to two irrigation
treatments. Specifically, palmitic acid, stearic acid,
arachidic acid, and behenic acid exhibited a
significant difference with levels ranging from 9.00
- 21.93 (F = 11.48, p < 0.05), 4.63 - 10.06 (F = 10.76,
p < 0.05), 1.54 - 2.14 (F = 12.80, p < 0.05), and 1.30
to 1.43 (F = 8.39, p < 0.05) mg/g of seed,
respectively.’
Please refer to page 94, line 1-6.
The section has been amended, ensuring each of
the values matches the correct fatty acid.
Please refer to page 94, line 1-6.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis versionThis has been amended. as
follows for further clarification: ‘the average
palmitic acid and stearic acid contents were
comparable, with higher values in the WW
treatment (ranging from 11.44 - 21.93 mg/g and
5.73 – 10.03 mg/g of seed, respectively) than in the
WD treatment (9.00 to 16.73 mg/g and 4.63 to
8.07 mg/g, respectively).’
Please refer to page 94, line 12-16.
The SFA, MUFA and PUFA results recorded from
commercially sourced samples have been
integrated into the corresponding datasets
recorded from the field-grown samples, to
facilitate the comparisons. In addition, these
commercial samples, include them in
these tables.
Page 104, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
Is this correct? Stearic acid is C18:0; In
table 3-18, the content favoured WW
and not WD. Please check.
Page 104, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 8
Sample 17 also had same values for
both WD and WW
Page 104, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 27
Considering the very low levels of this
fatty acid (a minor one), is this
comparison relevant? Overall, the focal
MUFA will be oleic acid.
Page 106, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 1
Please explain the superscripts in the
table. Which directions are the
interactions - varietal or irrigation
treatment.
Page 108, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 20
ideally you can include these data in
the other respective tables.
datasets are now denoted as Table 3-11, Table 3-
12, and Table 3-13, respectively, and have been
relocated in Appendix F.
The reviewer is correct, and pPalmitic acid and
stearic acid contents were more prominent in the
WW treatment than in the WD treatment.
Please refer to page 95, line 24-28, which reflects
this amendment.
The reviewer is correct, and vVariety 17 presented
no statistically significant difference under the two
irrigation treatments.
Please refer to page 95, line 28, which includes this
amendment.
The reviewer is correct. The section highlighted by
the reviewer in the previous thesis version was
irrelevant. Hence, this paragraph has been
amended as follows: ‘however, cis-11-Eicosenoic
acid content seemed slightly to be influenced by
the water stress in some of the genotypes
(varieties 2, 12 and 5).’
Please refer to page 97, line 11-13.
The reviewer is correct. An explanation about the
superscripts in the dataset recorded on ‘Table 3-
19’ note was missing in the previous thesis
versionexamined thesis. Hence, this table note has
been amended as follows: ‘Note. ANOVA test
based on GC-MS data (p< 0.05). Tukey's HSD mean
separation was used to distinguish between
different varieties and two different irrigation
treatments. Varieties with the same lowercase
letters on the bars are not significantly different,
p<0.05. Abbreviations: C18:1, oleic acid; C20:1, cis-
11-eicosenoic acid; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty
acids; WD, water-deficit; WW, well-watered.
Nevertheless, this table was relocated to Appendix
F, and it is now denoted as Table 3-12.
The data recorded into Table 3-21 (fatty acid
profiling of commercially sourced samples) in the
previous thesis version has been integrated into
each of the respective tables together with field-
grown samples dataset. In addition, the tables are
now denoted as Table 3-11 (SFA), Table 3-12
(MUFA) and Table 3-13 (PUFA), and have been

Page 110, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Maybe delete this, as this is evident in
the table and figure. Also, it's a bit
confusing.
Page 110, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 11
This section could be made more
concise and shorter.
Page 110, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 12
This is incorrect. The fatty acid
composition is inherent within the
seed. Hence, used as a blueprint of
adulteration. Manufacturing processes
can not alter the profile drastically. The
key driver here is the variety/genotype
and other growing conditions (which
you mention in the next sentence
Page 110, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
relocated to Appendix F.
As the results recorded for oleic and linoleic acids
obtained from commercially sourced samples (with
respect to SFA, MUFA and PUFA) were relocated to
Appendix F, the highlighted section by the reviewer
has been amended for further clarification and
including more relevant observations as follows:
‘Moreover, CWS had the richest fatty acid contents
amongst all sesame samples tested in this study.
For example, CWS (69.28 mg/g) had six-fold and
four-fold higher average total SFA than in samples
AF-V6821 (12.41 mg/g) and AF-V6832 (17.35
mg/g), respectively. Whilst the average total MUFA
were seven-fold and five-fold higher in CWS
(139.18 mg/g) than in AF-V6821 (19.06 mg/g) and
AF-V6832 (30.23 mg/g), respectively, the average
total PUFA were eight-fold and four-fold higher in
CWS (152.16 mg/g) than in AF-V6821 (20.12 mg/g)
and AF-V6832 (34.36 mg/g), respectively. In
contrast, the average total SFA, MUFA and PUFA
were around three-fold higher in CWS (69.28 mg/g,
139.18 mg/g, and 152.16 mg/g) than in CBS (24.63
mg/g, 50.40 mg/g, and 46.22 mg/g).’ as described
on
Please refer to page 100, lines 10-19.
The section has been amended. as follows:
‘The seeds procured from commercial retailers,
were abundant in oleic acid and linoleic acid
contents, particularly more prominent in varieties
CWS and CBS’.
Please refer to page 100, lines 20-21.
The reviewer is correct. The highlighted section by
the reviewer in the previous thesis version has
been removed. The same section has been
amended as follows: ‘The seeds procured from
commercial retailers, were abundant in oleic acid
and linoleic acid contents, particularly more
prominent in variety CWS, possibly due to
genotypic features.’
Please refer to page 100, line 20-22.
The reviewer is correct. Hence, tThe highlighted
section by the reviewer in the previous thesis
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 18
Maybe, these are not contrasting.
What is evident is that, the irrigation
effect interacts with the variety. Hence,
regardless of irrigation treatment,
variety is important.
Page 110, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 20
Please rewrite this for clarity.
Page 110, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 32
11.2 and 11.4 are almost the same and
could just be due to instrumental
effects.
Page 111, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 24
It is important to define what
correlation means and decided. One
may argue that anything below 0.5 is
no correlation. In this case, anything
<0.4 shows no correlation than a weak
positive or negative correlation.
Something to consider.
Page 112, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 3
How is 0.2 a good correlation? They
have less predictive power.
version has been removed.
Please refer to page 101, line 3.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis version, has been amended. as
follows: ‘For instance, a Korean study conducted
on eighteen different sesame genotypes reported
small changes in the UFA contents subjected to
different irrigation regimes (52). These genotypes
presented differences in the oleic acid and linoleic
acid contents, with a wider range in the WD
treatment (from 40.3 – 45.3 mg/g and 40.9 to 46.1
mg/g of seed, respectively) than in the WW
treatment (from 41.0 – 44.3 mg/g and 42.4 – 46.2
mg/g of seed, respectively).
Please refer to page 101, line 3-8.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis version has been amended. as
follows: ‘the level of palmitic acid was not affected
by the irrigation treatment, which varied from
11.2% (in the WW treatment) to 11.4% (in the WD
treatment)’.
Please refer to page 101, lines 15-16.
The reviewer is correct, and aA correlation
coefficient has been defined as follows: ‘The
correlation coefficient with a negative value
indicates a negative linear correlation, a positive
value indicates a positive linear correlation, 0
indicates no linear correlation, 0-0.3 indicates a
weak linear correlation, 0.3-0.7 indicates a
moderate linear correlation, and 0.7-1 indicates a
strong correlation.’
Please refer to page 102, line 21-24.
The reviewer is correct. Based on the definition
explained in the previous comment, the figure
caption with respect to Figure 3-17 has been
amended in the previous thesis version. This
amendment is as follows: ‘Correlations with R
values above 0.40 or below -0.40 were statistically
significant at α = 0.05.’
In addition, Figure 3-17 is now denoted as Figure 3-

Page 112, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 8
Note that these assays are specific to
unique compounds and functional
groups.
Page 114, Chapter 3. Bioactive
potential of the Australian-grown
sesame seed. 3.5 Conclusions. Line 10
May be food technologist and
nutritionists than health professionals.
20.
Please refer to page 103, line 8-11.
The reviewer is correct. TPC is typically correlated
with various antioxidant activity assays (i.e., ABTS,
DPPH, FRAP, ORAC, CUPRAC) to evaluate the total
contribution of the respective analyte. As the
correlation coefficient between TPC and CUPRAC
assay resulted negative and very low, this could
indicate the very poor contribution of phenolics to
overall antioxidant activity. On the other hand, TPC
and FRAP had a weak positive relationship.
Therefore, the highlighted section by the reviewer
in the previous thesis version was amended. as
follows:
‘Recently, Ruslan et al. (32) observed a weak
significantly negative correlation (r = -0.976, p < 0.01)
between the TPC of black sesame seed extract and the
total antioxidant activity measured by a similar protocol
(EC50 FRAP). This was probably due to increased TPC
values found in sesame extracts with higher values in
dark-coloured than in light-coloured extracts.
Meanwhile, a more recent report (33), claimed
significant correlations between FRAP and TPC (r =
0.708, p < 0.01), together with other correlations
between minor compounds. The authors indicated that
the correlations between different assays and phenolics
could be different; however, the authors postulated
that the TPC could be a good indicator of the
antioxidant activity. Hence, the weak relationships
found between TPC, and the total antioxidant activity
(measured by FRAP and CUPRAC) in the current study
may suggest that there is a minimal or no contribution
of the total phenolics to the overall antioxidant activity.
The likely cause of this may be attributed to
unspecified phenolic compounds and the potential
synergistic interactions among these compounds or
including the major phenolics. In addition, CUPRAC
and FRAP assays are specific methods to measure
unique compounds and functional groups. Hence,
the antioxidants present in sesame extracts were
not capable of reducing oxidants (ferric and cupric)
in the present study (38).’
Please refer to pages 103 lines 3-19, respectively.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis version has been amended as per
the reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 106, line 17.
Page 115, Chapter 4. Fatty acid profiling The reviewer is correct. The chapter title in the
of sesame seed oils. 4.1 Overview. Line previous thesis version was limited and failed in
1 capturingto capture all the different protocols
Please revise the chapter title. Since carried out in the field-grown samples. Hence, this
section 4.8.1 is about oil extraction and has been amended considering the reviewer’s
yield, this should be captured in the suggestion.
title - E.g. Oil extraction, fatty acid Please refer to page 107, lines 1 to 3.
composition and lignan composition of
Australian black sesame seed varieties.
Page 115, Chapter 4. Fatty acid profiling The reviewer is correct. The title has been
of sesame seed oils. 4.1 Overview. Line amended as per the previous comment.
6 Please refer to page 107, line 1-3.
If it considers these, why is the title
only about Fatty acid profiling?
Page 116, Chapter 4. Fatty acid profiling The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
of sesame seed oils. 4.3 Oil extraction. previous thesis version, has been amended for
Line 13 further clarification of the sesame oil extraction. as
This is a bit unclear. follows: ‘After obtaining the maximum amount of
sesame oil, the motor direction was reversed using
an inverter direction switch to further achieve the
highest possible yield of sesame oil.’
Please refer to page 108, line 17-19.
Page 117, Chapter 4. Fatty acid profiling The reviewer is correct. The title’s section titled 4.4
of sesame seed oils. 4.4 HPLC analysis failed to describeing the targeted compounds
of the sesame oil. Line 17 identified by the respective method of analysis
The title should be about what was (HPLC) in the previous thesis version. Hence, this
analysed than the just method. title has been amended as ‘Determination of
lignans in sesame oil using HPLC analysis.’
Please refer to page 110, line 11.
Page 118, Chapter 4. Oil extraction, Thank you for your queries.
fatty acid composition and lignan The standard used for the calibration was Restek
composition of Australian black sesame Food Industry FAME Mix (REST-35077), as
seed varieties. 4.6 FAME gas described in Chapter 3, section 3.2.12 (page 65,
chromatography- mass spectrometry line 5-8), with no modifications.
(GC-MS) analysis. Line 4 The following information has been removed from
What standard was used for the the previous thesis version to avoid confusion:
calibration? Were they neat ‘External calibration (nine calibration points for
compounds of each fatty acids or the each individual fatty acid) was performed.
FAME Mix? Identification of the detected components was
performed by matching their mass spectra with the
reference spectra in NIST14 and NIST14s libraries
(https://chemdata.nist.gov/) and comparing
retention times with their standards. The
constructed calibration curves for FAMEs of the
fatty acids as well as method validation parameters
are in Appendix E.’
Please refer to page 110, line 31.
Page 118, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 23
General comment: Consider comments
made in the previous section regarding
duplication of datasets using different
formats.
Page 118, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 24
It is recommended to shorten this
section as the extraction technique
limits discussion. Importantly, the
section is not about the extraction
yield. Solvent extraction gives a
complete picture as you can estimate
oil content for comparison. At the
moment, it is difficult to ascertain if the
effects are seed driven or process
driven.
Page 119, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Caution: Considering it is impossible to
quantify losses in the screw press
meaning, there could be bias in the
analysis. How do you account for the
different extraction yields and explain
the differences. Maybe, limit the
discussions to high the key aspect
because it might be difficult to justify
some of the trends.
Page 120, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 14
Hence, focus on the discussion on the
key data because, commercially, screw
press designs are advanced and
efficient than the bench top type used.
Datasets recorded for oil yield percentage, lignans
(sesamin and sesamolin), and fatty acids have been
removed and relocated in Appendix F, keeping the
table number as per the respective chapter, to
avoid duplication of datasets. Figures have been
kept within the main text.
The reviewer is correct. The section referred to oil
extraction yield and percentage analysis was
extensive and many of the explanations were
possibly irrelevant in the previous thesis version.
Hence, it has been shortened. The content was
streamlined, by keeping clarity and relevance. Any
limitations imposed by the extraction technique
were addressed to keep the discussion concise.
Please refer to pages 112 and 113, lines 15-22 and
1-10, respectively.
The reviewer is correct. The discussion provided
could have given the incorrect impression in the
previous thesis version, and therefore, biased
results. To address this, a different framework has
been adopted. This includes including the
suggestions given by the reviewers. Specifically,
potential factors that could contribute to poor oil
yielded were sample size (67), seed architecture
(68), scarce replications (69) and inefficiencies of
pressing equipment (70,71). These amendments
have been incorporated the new thesis version.
Please refer to page 112, line 15-18.
The reviewer is correct. The focus on the discussion
should have been on the key data. Hence,
Aadequate steps have been now incorporated in
the new thesis version, to mitigate any bias.
Please refer to pages 112 and 113, lines 15-22 and
1-11, respectively.
To discuss yield, adequate steps should
be taken to mitigate any bias, which
was not the case.
Page 121, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 3
Again, this should have been consider
in the experimental design. Address
this by limiting the discussion here.
Page 121, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 9
Again, this could have been addressed
in the extraction experimental design.
You must consider seed properties and
architecture as they influence screw
pressing of oil from seeds. Noting that
these bench tops are not design to be
robust as industrial processes making
the data no translatable
to industrial applications.
Page 121, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 21
Do you know the actual oil content of
the samples form soxhlet extraction?
That will provide a better picture of
yield.
Page 122, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Evidently, the solvent extractions had
higher yields.
Page 122, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 15
Were are these values?
Limited field replication samples were
acknowledged within the experimental design (as
described on page 112, line 16-21). Nevertheless,
to mitigate any bias it was noteworthy to briefly
mention some adequate steps to address the poor
amount of desired oil yielded from the process.
Please refer to page 112 and 113, lines 16-22 and
1-3, respectively.
The reviewer is correct. Although, unquantified
seed material stuck in the screw barrel and the
rotational screw was briefly acknowledged in the
discussion of results, some potential features such
as seed architecture and other seed properties
were missing. Hence, the combination of seed
architecture and inefficiencies of the benchtop
extraction method were included in the new thesis
version.
Please refer to page 113, line 4-11.
The values of the oil content reported by previous
investigations were recorded stated further on
page 114, line 10-17 (including Soxhlet method).
These values were 40.4 – 53.2% and 37.24 –
55.50%, conducted in Korea (52), and Algeria (72),
respectively.
The reviewer is correct.
No further amendments were actioned in this
section.
The average oil yield values of 11-research samples
were incorrect in the previous thesis version.
Hence, these values have been amended in the
new thesis version. In addition, the average oil
yielded from both, field-grown samples and
commercially sourced samples were integrated

Page 123, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
Is this the right place for this figure?
Line 12
Should these be the same?
Line 20
Also, the type of screw press and seed
physiology/architecture
Page 124, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 15
Fatty acids in oils can withstand
moderate temperatures of up to 100
degrees C. The key is retention time -
how long you hold at the temperature.
Page 124, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 31
What about the oil mass balance which
is the key consideration here.
Page 125, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
into one table, and now are denoted as Table 4-1.
This table was also relocated to Appendix F.
Please refer to page 114, line 8-9.
The Figure 4-3 has been relocated and is now
denoted as Figure 4-4.
Please refer to page 113, line 1.
The reviewer is correct. Hence, theThe highlighted
section has been removed. Sample preparation
technique has been incorporated instead.
Please refer to page 114, line 16.
The type of screw press was considered and
further explained on page 114, lines 15-24. Seed
architecture was also incorporated on page 113,
line 6-7.
Correct. Fatty acids present in oils may tolerate
moderate temperatures; however, this does not
necessarily apply for bioactive compounds (49).
This was considered in the initial experimental
design. The sections referring to the ‘emission of
volatile compounds’ together with the ‘negative
impact on fatty acids in sesame seed by-products’
and irrelevant trials details were was removed.
The temperature held during oil extraction is
around 30 seconds. The following paragraph was
incorporated to focus on the key data: ‘Data
obtained from small-scale machines may not be
directly applicable to industrial applications, as
these are typically more efficient than bench-
pressing machines (208). Whilst design and
capabilities of small-scale machines may limit oil
recovery, data obtained herein can still be useful
for phytochemical analysis (57).’ Please refer to
page 114, line 11-15.
The section was amended by directly referring to
oil mass balance. , as follows:
‘Thus, the design and capabilities of small-scale
machines could limit the amount of oil extracted
and the accuracy of oil yield data obtained (57).’
Please refer to page 114, line 15-17.
The section has been amended as follows: ‘Taking
together, several factors may have contributed to
producing poor oil yields. Particularly, the oil
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 4
What does this mean? The screw press
did affect oil yield considering it was
impossible to estimate the
actual/precise yield.
Line 17
You only analysed for these, hence,
how do you know they are the main
constituents?
Line 27
This is probably the best place to start.
You state significant variations, then
again no statistically significant
differences - these seems
contradictory.
Page 127, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 18
Definitely, however, it also depends on
the capacity of the extraction protocol
to release the compounds from the
seed matrix.
Line 3
This is tied to the seed and the
extraction process.
Line 12
Caution here: this analysis should align
with the previous section. It depends
on the partition between the cake and
oil. Meaning if there is less in oil, the
should be more in cake.
Page 129, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
extraction method used, the sample size, the seed
physiology, the way the sample was pre-
conditioned, and the limitations of the pressing
equipment. However, the data recorded herein
could still be valuable for reference in future
experiments and for phytochemical analysis.’to
provide clarity.
Please refer to page 114, 18-22.
The section ‘main bioactive constituents’, has been
amended as the ‘key bioactive compounds’.
Please refer to page 114, line 25.
A subtitle (‘Sesamin’) has been incorporated to
distinguish between the two key lignans identified
in sesame oil extracts. Please refer to page 114,
line 28.
‘significant variation’ has been amended as
‘minimal variation’.
Please see the amendment on page 114, line 29.
Correct. The following paragraph has been
incorporated to include the reviewer’s suggestion.:
‘however, it is important to note that the
extraction protocol, its specificity, and parameters
for sample preparation can limit the release of
various compounds from the seed matrix
(10,52,73).
Please refer to pages 114, lines 13-15.
Please refer to previous comment.
Please refer to pages 116 and 117, lines 21 and 1-2.
The reviewer is correct. The highlighted section by
the reviewer should be consistent with what was
discussed in the previous section. Hence, this
paragraph was removed. in the new thesis version.
Please refer to page 117, line 12.
The reviewer is correct. The highlighted section by
the reviewer in the previous thesis version was
incorrect. Hence, the section has been amended by
including important seed features and genotypic
Discussion. Line 21.
Should this be about variety and seed
properties than manufacturing
processing?
Page 130, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
Is this study about oils or seeds? Your
study is about seeds and not oil
heating.
Page 130, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 12
One may argue that those values are all
consistent.
Page 130, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 26
Please clarify this point.
characteristics.
Please refer to page 118, lines 13-15.
The current study should be focus on aligned
observations that have reported in previous
studies. The section has been amended accordingly
to clarify the argument. : ‘For instance, the study
conducted by Wu (74) utilised the HPLC analysis
coupled with a UV detector amongst different
sesame oils from popular commercial brands and
blended sesame oils, in Taiwan. Their results had a
wider variation in sesamin content ranging from
6.05 – 13.77 mg/g of oil, than the ranges obtained
in this study. Although the sample preparation
parameters utilised in the current study were
similar, sesamin levels were lower than those
reported by Wu (74). The authors suggested this
heat-sensitive lignan compound can be destroyed
by high temperatures.’
Please refer to page 118, lines 17-23.
The highlighted section by the reviewer has been
amended accordingly and the following paragraph
has been incorporated to clarify the argument: ‘For
example, Shi et al. (75) obtained higher sesamin
values (2.07 – 7.51 mg/g) than those estimated in
this study. These differences could be due to the
parameters used within the phytochemical
analysis. The authors used different oil sample
masses (0.2 g), different solvents (MeOH), different
extraction techniques (ultrasonication), and HPLC
coupled with a UV-Vis detector to analyse various
commercial sesame oil brands in China (75).’.
Please refer to page 119, lines 3-8.
The section has been slightly amended to clarify
the argument. as follows: ‘Similarly, Sukumar et al.
(76), assessed various sesame oil colours using an
older technique, and found higher average sesamin
levels (7.20 mg/g) than those estimated in this
study. While the results obtained through the
HPLC-DAD method used in this study were
generally consistent, it is noteworthy that the oil
extraction method (pressing) used could have
contributed to obtaining poor sesamin values.
Nevertheless, other studies have utilised different
solvents, modifications of the analysis method, and
sample preparation techniques. Therefore, these

Page 136, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 2
Maybe delete this.
Page 136, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
This first paragraph has already been
written. So move on to discuss the
results. Also, there is no Appendix H.
Page 144, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 11
Is 97% correct? This means that all the
other component make up 3%. Some of
the sames have almost the same
amounts of oleic and linoleic acid.
Please verify your calculation.
Page 145, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
Discussion. Line 2
Are fatty acids in seed oils classified as
bioactive compounds? If so, then all
edible oils are bioactive ingredients.
Please verify this.
Page 145, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.8 Results and
factors should be taken into consideration to
increase sesamin content.’
Please refer to page 119, lines 15-23.
The section has been amended as per the
reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 123, line 16.
The reviewer is correct. Hence, the highlighted
paragraph has been removed from the previous
thesis version, as per the reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 123, line 17.
Thank you for your query.
The highlighted section by the reviewer was
incorrect in the previous thesis version. Thus, the
statement has been amended. as follows: ‘In
summary, the findings presented in this
investigation highlight linoleic acid as the dominant
component among all the fatty acids, followed by
oleic, palmitic, and stearic acids, accounting for
approximately 96% of the total fatty acids.’
Please refer to page 129, line 16-18, which reflects
this amendment.
The reviewer is correct. Fatty acids can be classified
as bioactive lipid components in seed oils;
however, their presence mostly in seed oils
suggests a functional role as defence metabolites
to protect the plant from pathogen attacks
together with their ecological importance against
insects and other pathogens.
Thus, the title of section 4.8.4 has been amended
as follows: ‘Correlation analysis between lignans
and fatty acids in sesame oil’. In addition, the
highlighted section by the reviewer has been
amended as ‘lignans and fatty acids’.
Please refer to page 130, line 12-14.
An additional paragraph was incorporated to
compare the correlations obtained in sesame seeds
(Chapter 3) and sesame oils (Chapter 4).), as
follows: ‘In addition, the relationship between
Discussion. Line 11
It would been helpful to compare this
correlations with what you obtained for
the seeds in Chapter 3.
Page 146, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.9 Conclusions. Line 6
Please revise this to capture the
extraction process. Because the
sesamin and sesamolin was lower (r = 0.89, p <
0.05) in sesame seeds than in sesame oils (r = 0.91,
p < 0.05) in the current study. These findings are
consistent with other reports (77,78) suggesting
that increasing sesamin content by plant water
stress could result in an increase in sesamolin
content.’
Please refer to page 131 and 132, lines 17 and 1-4,
respectively, which reflects this amendment.
Additionally, other correlations reported in
previous studies were incorporated to
support/contrast the results obtained in the
current investigation. , as follows: ’These findings
contrast with results from previous efforts (53). A
positive correlation between oleic acid and
sesamolin (r = 0.426, p<0.01), and stearic acid and
sesamin (r = 0.336, p<0.05) were reported,
whereas a negative correlation was found between
linoleic acid and sesamolin content (r = -0.438,
p<0.01). These inconsistencies may suggest that
the biosynthesis of lignans and fatty acids are
distinct from each other; however, their pathways
may converge towards the seeds. Moreover,
correlations obtained in sesame seeds and sesame
oils in the current study contrast with other studies
(79). Whilst stearic acid had a positive correlation
with oleic acid (r = 0.304, p<0.01), it had an inverse
relationship with both linoleic (r = -0.919, p<0.01)
and linolenic (r = -0.133, p<0.01) acids. Were et al.
(12), also reported an opposite relationship
between oleic and arachidic acids and a strong
negative correlation between oleic and linoleic
acids (r = -0.919). According to these authors, the
fatty acid composition in sesame seeds is primarily
determined by various enzymatic processes of fatty
acid synthesis; however, the positive correlations
recorded from the current investigation may
postulate that the water stress approach could
lead to increase the fatty acid composition.’
Please refer to page 130, line 20-33.
The following paragraph has been incorporated to
reflecting the impact of extraction process used for
the lignan and fatty acids profiling: ‘however, the
oil extraction method adopted in this study
seemed to have contributed in some extent to
poor lignan contents, in combination with the
analysis focused mostly on the impact
of extraction of some of these
compounds.
Page 147, Chapter 4. Oil extraction,
fatty acid composition and lignan
composition of Australian black sesame
seed varieties. 4.9 Conclusions. Line 10
You don't typically add references to
conclusions.
Page 152, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.2 Materials
and Methods. Line 7
This was only done on the cake
samples, make note of this.
Page 152, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of by-products
generated during oil extraction from
Australian-
grown sesame seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 29
This reads like a summary than results
and discussion.
Page 158, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 14
This is inaccurate - you did not use the
most advanced screw presses. Systems
used in large scale operations have
better engineering designs and
efficiencies that a small bench top
setup.
Line 20
Rewrite this
Line 22
Does this apply to the cake yield? I am
not sure if this angle is relevant. The
cake yield is largely influenced by
amount of oil extracted. This is
extraction protocol chosen prior to HPLC analysis.’.
Please refer to page 132, lines 20-22.
The highlighted reference in the previous thesis
version has been removed, as per the reviewer’s
suggestion.
Please refer to page 133, line 4, which reflects this
amendment.
The reviewer is correct. The preparation of Fatty
Acid Methyl Esters (FAME) and FAME analysis by
gas chromatography- mass spectrometry (GC-MS)
was carried out on sesame cake extracts only.
Hence, these amendments were reflected on page
137, sections 5.2.8 and 5.2.9, lines 3-4 and 7-8,
respectively.
The reviewer is correct. The highlighted section by
the reviewer in the previous thesis version refers to
a summary, in which relevant observations were
recorded to justify why TPC and the antioxidant
activity were not estimated in the current study;
however, it can be removed without affecting the
meaning of the following sections and to keep
consistent and concise the content.
Please refer to page 138, line 24.
The reviewer is correct; however, the section
highlighted by the reviewer in the previous thesis
versionThis section has been amended, considering
the reviewer’s input, as follows: ‘On the other
hand, the pressing method used to extract oil from
sesame seeds was postulated as inefficient. This
was due to a low total mass obtained from each
sesame seed by-product (as described in Chapter 4
- section 4.8.1), including oil, and by-products
derived from seeds. There was a material loss
ranging between 39.19 - 62.75% during the oil
extraction process, which varied depending on the
sesame variety and the irrigation treatment. The
loss factor was attributed to a combination of seed
architecture and the limitations of the bench-
equipment design.’ Please refer to page 142, line
16-22.
The section has been amended as follows: ‘There
was a material loss ranging between 39.19 -
62.75% during the oil extraction process, which
something you should consider against
Chapter 4. I think you should simply
this section and make it shorter and
concise.
Page 159, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 1
Poor yields of what? The cake or the
sludge? You don't have control of this
as you cannot form more cake because
it is tied to the seed and oil yield. From
process efficiency you want smaller
cake and sludge yields as indicators of
oil extraction efficiencies. High cake
yield may suggest low oil yields. Please
consider this.
Page 160, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 18
This may be more process related.
varied depending on the sesame variety and the
irrigation treatment.’
Please refer to page 144, line 19-21.
Seed architecture, equipment design and the
friction concepts are quite relevant for the results
obtained in poor yields of sesame derived by-
products. The following paragraph has been
amended in the text to further clarify the idea. :
‘The loss factor was attributed to a combination of
seed architecture and the limitations of the bench
equipment. During the processing of seeds, a
notable occurrence of low friction between the
internal surface of pressing equipment and the
surface of sesame seeds themselves is developed
(43). Hence, this lower friction may lead to an
incomplete physical recovery of extracted mass
and decrease the output material. It is believed
that unprocessed seeds and cake remained with
valuable material, that could not be accounted for,
as stated by Martinez et al. (80) and Ghiasi et al.
(67).’
Please refer to page 142, line 21-28.
The section been amended by incorporating: ‘of
by-products (cake and sludge)’.
Please refer to page 145, line 1, which reflects this
amendment.
Regarding the reviewer’s suggestion, the argument
has been amended as follows: ‘Further research
and optimisation of the method may be necessary
to improve the efficiency and increase the yields of
sesame oil, while decreasing cake, and sludge
yields.
Please refer to page 145, line 3-5.
Correct. The following paragraph has been
incorporated: ‘According to the average values of
moisture content observed in both, sesame cake
and sesame sludge samples (Table 5-1) irrigation
stress had no influence on the moisture content;
however, these results could be more attributed to
other oil processing factors and sesame
genotypes.’
Please refer to page 146, line 17-20.
Page 160, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 23
How so, considering the same protocol
for all samples.
Page 161, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 4
Does this have any relevance? If not
you may remove it.
Page 161, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
This is not the place to conclude
because you have other data to discuss.
Also, you don't need global data for
comparison, high what your data shows
per your study objectives.
Page 161, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 19
Please revise this because you only
assayed for these two and nothing else,
hence, it's imprecise to say, they are
the main compounds identified.
It also repeats previous sections.
Page 163, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
The moisture content values obtained from
commercially sourced samples (Table 5-1)
presented small variations in sesame sludge
between different samples. However, this was not
the case for sesame cake samples. The cake
samples yielded increased material mass with
higher values in commercially sourced samples
than those yielded from field-grown samples.
These data were inconsistent (data not shown),
possibly attributed to a combination of various
factors such as seed architecture, equipment
design (pressing method) and different sesame
genotypes. No further changes were implemented
in this section.
The highlighted section by the reviewer in the
previous thesis version has been removed as per
the reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 145, line 5, which reflects this
amendment.
The section ‘In conclusion’ has been amended as
‘Overall’.
Please refer to page 147, line 5.
To justify the purpose of this particular study
(moisture content) in sesame-derived by-products,
a paragraph has been incorporated as per the first
reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 147, line 9-12.
‘Antioxidants’ and unnecessary information was
removed, and the respective section was amended
and repetition removed. as follows: ‘Major lignans,
sesamin and sesamolin, which belong to the
phenylpropanoid class, were the two natural
components identified in each of the sesame cake
extracts yielded from field-grown trials, along with
cake extracts prepared from commercially sourced
sesame samples.’
Please refer to page 147, line 20-23.
The section has been amended by including the
reviewer’s suggestion in the following paragraph:
‘The implementation of irrigation treatments in
Australian- field trials may exhibit a more evident influence on
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and the subsequent sesame-derived products (i.e.
Discussion. Line 5 sesame cake). From the general trend illustrated in
This is a general comment to reflect on: Figure 5-6, it can be said that cake, as a sesame-
From the thesis style, having read the derived by-product is intricately linked to the seed
first results chapter, the reader can itself, and the irrigation regime plays an important
predict this effect because, all these role in sesamin content; however, the response to
components are related to the seed the irrigation treatment may vary depending on
effect. Hence, if moisture stress the sesame genotype.’
enhances these in the seed, then it is a Please refer to page 147, line 1-6.
flow on effect.
The reviewer may be right. Nevertheless, as
Line 7 explained in section 5.4.1.2 (moisture content),
Also, this point is captured by your sesame-derived by-products could be influenced
moisture stress. by the technique used during the oil processing,
including other parameters inherent to the seed
(i.e. seed architecture, varieties and genetics).
No further amendments were conducted in this
section.
Page 165, Chapter 5. Characterisation Correct, there is no need to correlate seed by-
of By-Products products (cake and sludge) to irrigation stress, due
Generated during Oil Extraction from to the evidence supporting that irrigation deficit
Australian- impacts lignans in the seed; however, the
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and enhanced lignan contents were more evident in
Discussion. Line 12 these two by-products than in the seed itself. The
Is there a need to correlate the sludge results recorded here could be used for future
to water stress? The sludge is largely a investigations that support the irrigation treatment
process driven effect. Yes, it might be approach.
worthwhile to note but why link to The recorded lignan values in this investigation
water stress? The risk is that, it makes particularly in sesame-derived by-products answer
the message a bit monotonous. Also, one of the research questions (specifically typical
the reader can predict that the same levels of lignans in black seedcake, and oil sludge).
will happen for the sesamolin section. It The following paragraph has been incorporated to
also applies to the cake. You could clarify the purpose of this study and to keep the
consider variety but cake properties are analysis concise: ‘From a general trend illustrated
also a process driven effect and in Figures 5-6 and 5-7, it can be said that cake and
because you already established that sludge, as a derived by-products yielded from
water stress impacts these compounds sesame oil, are intricately linked to the seed itself.
in the seed, one will expected a carry In addition, the irrigation regime applied during
on effect through the process. Hence, field trials was more evident in these two by-
no need to focus on water stress on the products as per the increased sesamin content
seed by-products because the earlier better adapted to irrigation deficit; however, the
effect won't change. sesamin levels may vary depending on the sesame
A way around this is to consider the genotype.’
compounds per chapter - Chapter 3 - Please refer to page 148 and 149, line 21-22 and
TPC and antioxidant effects; Chapter 4: 12-16, respectively.
Extraction and and quantification of
lignans, Chapter 5: Fatty acid profile in
sesame seed and sesame products -
with this, you can keep emphasizing
variety and water stress because you
are looking at independent and
unrelated compounds.
You have done a good amount of work
with good data; however, it could be
modified slightly for variety.
Page 166, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 21
I don't think you need this. Yes, if there
is data, compare, if not leave it. Also,
these results are very protocol
dependent - meaning such
comparisons could be misleading.
Make it shorter.
Page 168, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 5
Delete this - it only repeats what you
have said in the first part.
Page 169, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 18
Is this the two-way ANOVA?
Page 171, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 7
Again, it is difficult to argue that this is
a water stress effect than a process
The constructive suggestions on restructuring the
chapters of this investigation sound like a
promising avenue for exploring broader
relationships within the context of variety and
irrigation stress; however, the current structure
was carefully developed to address specific
research questions and objectives. These
adjustments may not be feasible for the current
study, but will be kept mind for future
researchpublications.
Correct. The section referring to ‘literature review
process’ was removed. Only the following has been
kept: ‘Results collected from a few international
investigations (60,81), were compared to the
results of sesame cake extracts obtained in this
study.’
Please refer to page 151, line 9-10.
The section has been removed as per the
reviewer’s suggestion.
Please refer to page 149, line 29-31.
Indeed, the highlighted section by the reviewer in
the previous thesis version refers toThis is a two-
way ANOVA.
No further amendments were conducted in this
section.
The reviewer’s suggestion has been considered.
Hence, the following paragraph has been
incorporated to improve the analysis:
‘The irrigation treatments conducted during field
trials exerted a substantial impact on the sesamolin
content found in sesame seed samples. This
influence became apparent in the subsequent
sesame-derived products, (sesame cake, Figure 5-
driven effect.
Page 173, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 6
Also, the argument about water stress
is a bit repetitive. Maybe remove some
references from the results analysis
section and introduce it in the
discussion.
Page 173, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 18
Why use the sludge as ingredients?
Ideally, combine with the cake.
Line 23
Why so? Is there any evidence to this
effect? It shows sesame as a good
alternate source than it being better
than others. Bearing in mind that, food
and nutrition is a complex issue.
Sesame adds to current provision than
present an edge over the others. For it
to be at the top, we must address
production issues etc.
Are there any references for the points
listed here?
Line 25
Why this section? It does not
contribute to the study
aims/objectives. Noting that, we
cannot just use some of the materials
as direct ingredients in
food processing for humans, hence,
8; sesame sludge, Figure 5-9). Given the intricate
connection between the two by-products and the
seed, it is noteworthy that the response to
irrigation treatments can vary, particularly in
consideration of the sesame genotype.’
Please refer to pages 147 and 151, lines 2-6 and
15-19, respectively.
The reviewer is correct. The water stress argument
seemed redundant. Hence, the paragraph
highlighted by the reviewer in the previous thesis
version was removed.
Please refer to page 152, line 26.
Correct; however, future prospects would rather
prefer to keep theseThese two by-products are
different in composition and come from different
times in the oil extraction process. As such the
presentation of both separately has been
maintained. separated depending on the use and
the food application. No further amendments were
incorporated in this section.
The section ‘sesame cake may present higher
health benefit contents’ was incorrect. This section
has been amended as: ‘sesame cake appears to be
a promising comparative or alternative source of
protein content (45.3 – 45.9%), due to comparable
values in other edible oilseed meals’.
References have been also incorporated.
Please refer to pages 155, lines 22-25.
The respective section pretended to compare the
values obtained from moisture content in this work
to those obtained from other edible oilseed cakes;
however, this section was incomplete. To complete
it, the following information was incorporated:
‘The percentage of moisture content should not
exceed 9% (39). This threshold is crucial to
maximise shelf storage and maintain material
integrity (40).’ ThisAn amendment has been
reflected on page 155, line 27-29.
their use in animal feed. There are
antinutrients that must be dealt with.
Does sesame contain any
antinutrients?
Page 174, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 8
There seem to be a remarkable
difference between the fatty acid
composition in the cakes and the other
samples. Considering similar extraction
protocol, one will expect them to be a
bit closer.
Line 21
Maybe start from here. The first part is
same as previous sections and there is
no Appendix H.
Page 177, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-
Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4 Results and
Discussion. Line 23
Won't this apply to the other
discussions - MUFA and PUFA? Again as
mentioned earlier, it might be best to
not relate to water deficit as these
effects are tied to the seed.
Page 180, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line 6
I think these should be the other way
Sesame may have antinutrients such as oxalic acid
and phytic acid. Although the intake of these acids
may have a negative effect on various human
organs (37), they were not detected in this study.
No further amendments were conducted in this
section.
Correct. The differences are remarkable
particularly in the values of the major fatty acids:
palmitic acid, stearic acid, oleic acid and linoleic
acid.
No further amendments were conducted in this
section.
The first two paragraphs in the section 5.4.3 have
been removed, to keep the information concise. A
brief statement was incorporated to indicate the
datasets (SFA, MUFA and PUFA) were relocated in
Appendix F section and these datasets are now
denoted as Table 5-6, 5-7, and 5-8, respectively.
Please refer to page 156, line 13-16.
Since both, cake and oil, are derived from sesame
seeds, the variation in the fatty acid composition is
highly tied to the seed. Hence, the sections
including ‘water deficit’ have been removed and
the amended section is as follows: ‘Potential
explanations for the differences found in the SFA
content between the two irrigation treatments
may be due to genetic variation (26,258). Different
varieties of sesame may have different
combination of genes inherited from previous
breeding lines, which may influence the expression
of genes in different physiological processes,
including fatty acid metabolism and composition
(79,82).’
Please refer toon page 158, line 13-17.
Correct. Oleic acid content had lower values in the
WD treatment than WW treatment. The section
‘which ranged from 2.43 – 4.27 (mg/g of cake), and
from 3.31 – 4.71 (mg/g of cake), in the WW and
WD treatment’ has been amended as 'which
ranged from 2.43 – 4.27 (mg/g of cake), and from
round?
Line 7
these are not MUFAs
Line 22
How so? Were all varieties kept under
the same condition? Why will reduced
photosynthetic activity only apply
here?
Page 183, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line 32
This is a repetition of the points just
made in the previous paragraph.
Page 184, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.4
Results and Discussion. Line 6
The only phytochemicals tested are the
two lignans. Are fatty acids are
classified as phytochemicals?
Line 10
Considering this has been consistent
from the previous sections, it won't
change for the cake.
Line 15
Again, are fatty acids phytochemicals?
Page 185, Chapter 5. Characterisation
of By-Products
Generated during Oil Extraction from
Australian-Grown Sesame Seeds. 5.6
3.31 – 4.71 (mg/g of cake), in the WD and WW
treatments’.
Please refer to page 160, line 4-6.
Correct. The section ‘(palmitic acid, F = 2.45, p <
0.05; arachidic acid, F = 2.12, p < 0.05 )’ has been
amended as oleic acid, F = 2.45, p < 0.05; cis-11-
eicosenoic acid, F = 2.12, p < 0.05 ).
Please refer to page 160, line 6-7.
Since all varieties were kept under the two
irrigation conditions, the section ‘The lower oleic
acid content observed in the WD treatment could
be due to a reduction in photosynthetic activity
during blooming season, leading to a decrease in
the production of fatty acids’ is an incorrect
argument. Hence, this section was removed
without affecting the meaning of the respective
paragraph.
Please refer to page 160, line 21.
The section ‘In summary, the differences in the
linoleic acid content in all sesame cake samples
and between the two irrigation treatments could
be attributed to a combination of water
availability, environmental factors and genotypes’
has been removed as it results redundant.
Please refer to page 163, line 22-23.
The section ‘various phytochemical analytes’ has
been amended as ‘lignans and fatty acids’ to
distinguish the correlations conducted in sesame
cake.
Fatty acids are not classified as phytochemicals, but
a subclass of lipids.
Please refer to page 163, line 28.
I agree with the reviewer. Hence, no further
amendments were conducted in this section.
The highlighted section by the reviewer was
incorrect. The section has been amended as
‘lignans and fatty acids’ to distinguish the
correlations conducted in sesame cake.
Please refer to page 164 line 3-4.
Considering the reasons given by the reviewer, the
second paragraph from section 5.5 (Conclusions)
was removed. Only by-products concern to
Chapter 5. Please refer to page 165, line 6.
Conclusions. Line 12
Please, remove or revise this
paragraph.
1. The chapter was not about oil
extraction but the by-products. Hence,
why argue for high oil yields?
2. You cannot increase cake yield if you
want to increase oil yield - law of
conservation of mass. When you
extract more oil, ideally, you will
produce lower cake yield which is a
good thing for process efficiency. Your
process is about oil extraction with
cake as by-product, hence, why do you
argue for high yields? Please consider.
Page 190, Chapter 6. General A correction factor was essential to establish
discussion, future work and consistent moisture content values across the four
recommendations. 6.2 Evaluation of sesame products, making these values comparable.
moisture content in sesame products No further amendments were conducted in this
including seed, cake and sludge. Line 11 section.
I see the explanation but why is this
necessary at this stage? You used hot The section ‘Upon examining a range of chemical
air oven for seeds and freeze dryer for and physical factors that could impact the quality
by-products. That said, this is the first and structural integrity of sesame products’ has
mention of correction factor and make been amended as follows:
this an entirely new idea from the “Upon examining a range of potential factors that
study. could impact the quality and structural integrity of
sesame products’.
Line 25 Please refer to page 169, line 25-26.
The oil physical parameter assessed is
moisture content. ‘water availability' has been amended as ‘moisture
content’.
Line 27 Please refer to page 167, line 11.
This is incorrect and irrelevant to your
objectives. Please delete. The concept
of deterioration is a bit more complex.
You measured moisture content and
not available water.
Page 191, Chapter 6. General The section ‘to this loss factor’ was referring to the
discussion, future work and wide variation resulted in the loss of material. The
recommendations. 6.3 Sesame seed section ‘The main factor that could contribute
products yield for oil, cake and sludge. potentially to this loss factor was…’ has been
Line 20 amended as follows: ‘One of the potential reasons
Which factor? that could contribute to this wide variation was….’
Please refer to page 170, line 24-26, respectively.
Line 21
You mentioned in your discussion that Correct. Whilst the loss material was considered
this was insignificant, hence, it should
not matter.
Line 28
This seems to vary slightly from your
earlier discussions and conclusions.
Previously, you were explicit that water Correct. The section ‘it was inconclusive if water
stress affected these parameters.
Page 193, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.4 TPC, FRAP,
CUPRAC. Line 4
Please revise this statement. It suggests phytochemical content and activity levels in
that variations in irrigation regimes are sesame seeds.’
due to those factors.
Maybe '.. variations in irrigation
regime, climate fluctuations ......
Line 10
One thing that the analysis failed to
highlight is why there was higher
content in the sludge. The discussion
focused on effect of water stress;
however, the increase content in
sludge is process driven due to
accumulation and concentration.
Page 193, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.5 Lignans in
sesame products. Line 29
Again, note that these are purposely
for laboratory analytical uses and are
insignificant for phytochemical quantification, it did
affect the recovery of the yielded sesame by-
products during the oil processing.
Please refer to page 112, line 15-16. No further
changes were made in this section.
stress applied in the field trials had some influence
in the levels of the oil yielded from sesame seeds’
contradicted earlier discussions described in
Chapters 4 and 5. Hence, the mentioned statement
above was amended as follows: ‘Based on this
information, water stress applied in the field trials
may have some influence on the levels of the oil
yielded from sesame seeds’.
Please refer toon page 171, line 3-4.
The highlighted statement has been amended as
follows: ‘Thus, variation in irrigation regimes,
climate fluctuations, planting location, evolution
and post-harvesting procedures may influence
Please refer to on page 173, line 12-15.
The highlighted section was incorrect, as the data
was given in terms of sludge mass. All units of
measurement were transformed in terms of the
initial seed so that all the values would be
comparable. An amendment has been
incorporated , as follows:
‘the highest average levels of sesamin content
were found in sesame seed samples, particularly
higher for the WD treatment (1.16 ± 0.55 mg/g)
than for the WW treatment (0.79 ± 0.51 mg/g),
whereas the lowest values were found in sesame
cake and sesame sludge samples, with higher
values in the WD treatment (0.04 ± 0.02 and 0.07 ±
0.01 mg/g, respectively) than for the WW
treatment (0.02 ± 0.01 and 0.04 ± 0.02 mg/g,
respectively).’
Please refer to on page 173, line 19-24.
Correct. The section ‘For instance, in other
protocols a
second stage has been acknowledged, taking into
consideration the use of powerful but still toxic
solvents such as n-hexane, isopropanol, amongst
others’ has been amended as follows: ‘Whilst a
the only means to completely quantify
these compounds unless
techniques like supercritical fluid/gas
are used which again do have their
limitations in commercial uses.
Food grade hexane for solvent
extraction is well used technique in
food processing. The reality is
mechanical extraction has limitations
because it can interact complex with
the material matrix.
Page 195, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.7
Recommendations. Line 14
Why so much focus on the screw
press? The screw press method was not
one of your study objectives. It was just
a tool to extract oil, so why
focus so much on it. Unless you update
your objectives.
Page 195, Chapter 6. General
discussion, future work and
recommendations. 6.7
Recommendations. Line 21
Is this purely, laboratory based issue?
Does this translate to commercial
industry applications? Typically
mechanical press designs do not have
pressure systems - they are similar to
what you used but design for efficiency.
Page 239, Appendix E. Line 14
Which standards were used for this
calibration? Are these individual neat
standards of these fatty acids? This has
not be explained in the
second stage has been acknowledged, taking into
consideration the use of some organic solvents (i.e.
n-hexane, isopropanol, amongst others), they can
have a better affinity for certain compounds.’
Please refer toon page 174, 8-10.
Correct. The emphasis in the revision has been
amended by focusing on the primary study
objectives.
‘Modifications in sample preparation including the
choice of alternative solvents, the sample size
adjustment, and sample conditioning may improve
the bioactive content levels and enhance the
overall efficiency and accuracy of the analytical
process.
Whilst TPC, FRAP and CUPRAC assays resulted in
comparable values in sesame seeds, extending
these protocols to sesame oil and derived by-
products could be valuable. Again, sample
conditioning may lead to obtain reliable and
reproducible results.
Another recommendation would be the
combination of genetic and metabolomic studies.
This perspective could offer a deeper
understanding of how sesame adapts at the
molecular level to different irrigation conditions.’
Please refer to page 176 and 177, 23-25 and 1-7.
The reviewer is correct. Industrial-scale presses are
designed for enhancing oil recovery, compared to
benchtop mechanical equipment. Hence the
highlighted section in the previous thesis version
has beenwas removed.
The FAME Mix, which comprises a solution that
includes 37 individual fatty acid methyl esters.
 method.

* Please note that should you reject the suggested change made by the Reviewer, you
MUST justify your decision in the response to the Reviewer column.