73 / 151
4. Based on the supporting
information, is the method
written clearly and concisely?
If no, please specify the
needed revisions.
The method could be written more concisely without compromising the quality of the
work performed.
5. Based on the supporting
information, what are the
pros/strengths of the
method?
Strengths:
The time required for the whole analysis appears to be shortened compared to the
existing literature. The LODs reached are very challenging.
The evaluation of the recovery has been done correctly and accruing the goodness of
the method.
The possibility to extend the method also to other categories of nuts.
The method was successfully run on three different MS platforms.
6. Based on the supporting
information, what are the
cons/weaknesses of the
method?
Weaknesses: The use of three different enzymes.
It is expensive and add another variable to the whole procedure. Maybe a combination
of two enzymes could be investigated to originate peptides with a medium length.
7. Any general comments
about the method?
The method is very well described and the experimental work has been properly
carried out. The final sensitivity and recovery calculated are very promising.
Do you recommend this
method be adopted as a First
Action and published in the
Official Methods of Analysis
of AOAC INTERNATIONAL?
Please specify rationale.
Yes with small modifications