My major concern about this manuscript is the novelty which the authors have not sufficiently proven. The details of my comments are as follows:
Abstract: The effect of nicotinamide/STZ administration on the lipid profile, serum insulin, liver glycogen content, was not fully captured in the abstract. The authors only reported the effect of administration of M. paradisiaca leaf and fruit peel extracts on these parameters in the diabetic rats. Authors should also consider to include some numeric values in their abstract. All abbreviations such as HOMA-IS, CK-MB, LDH, AST, SOD, GPx and GST as written in the abstract should be written in full at first mention.
Introduction
L52, consider to write STZ in full before abbreviating it. L59-63, since previous studies had shown the antihyperglycemic and antioxidant activities of M. paradisiaca, it is not clear what new information the authors want to report in this study. Consequently, the novelty of this study is questionable.
L67, the objective and justification for this study is not clear at all. L69, suggest to correct 'NA/ATZ' to 'NA/STZ'. Please write NA in full before abbreviating it.
M&M;
L73, it is not clear what the authors mean by collecting from 'XXX' in the ..........and this type of presentation using the letters 'XXX' occurred in different parts of the materials and methods section.
Preparation of plant extracts
L77, the duration of air drying (in hrs or days) should be reported. L84, what were the percentage yields of the extracts of the M. paradisiaca leaves and peels?
Induction of DM
L108, rats with 2-hours serum glucose ranging from 200 to 300 mg/dl cannot be said to have mild diabetes mellitus (and definitely not T2DM), but rather Type 1 DM. This is another flaw in this manuscript. Authors are advised to check previously published articles on the induction of T2DM in experimental rats using nicotinamide/STZ.
Animal grouping
L113, suggest to write CMC in full before abbreviating it. L124, please indicate the name of the anesthesia that was used.
Statistical Analysis
Why did the authors use LSD for posthoc test, considering their sample size (6) and the challenge of LSD in producing inaccurate P-values? This questions the findings the authors reported.
Results
L179, suggest to use either 'significantly increased or decreased' to denote the effect of the extracts on the rats and not 'significantly improved' or 'significantly ameliorated' or 'amelioration' as used in many parts of the manuscript.
L202, it is not clear what the authors mean here and similar statements were made in L207, L213 and L231.
Table 1, the values that were obtained for the fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations of the rats question the model of diabetes.
Table 2, suggest to define (under the Table) the abbreviations; HOMA-IS and HOMA-beta cell function for clarity of presentation. Same is applicable to CK-MB, LDH and AST in Table 5 and LPO, GSH, SOD, GPx and GST in Table 7.
Discussion
L234-235, T2DM rarely leads to insulin deficiency, rather impaired insulin secretion and the article by Chandramhan et al. 2008 the authors cited did not state so. Please correct adequately.
L259, this statement is highly speculative as it was not supported by the data the authors presented. L286, avoid unnecessary speculation and report your findings based on the data obtained. Same is the case in L301 to 302 on hormone sensitive lipase which was not quantified by the authors.
Finally, the manuscript need to be edited for English Language

The manuscript can be accepted for publication in its present form