The study is interesting because it presents concrete findings that illustrate the material engineering benefits associated with the utilization of genipap oil. It enables better distribution of genipin during thermal processing compared to commercial genipin. The work is well-structured and provides crucial evidence supporting the use of genipin from genipap as a crosslinking agent in biomaterial production. Below, I am sending some comments to help the authors improve their manuscript before it is accepted for publication.

Reviewer Comments
I recommend that the authors use "Genipap" (if it's a universally recognized term) or "Genipa americana L" instead of "Caruto" (as this term appears to be specific to Venezuela). I also suggest standardizing the terminology for the studied fruit. At times, the authors use "genipap," while at other times, they use "Caruto." Therefore, please choose one term and use it consistently throughout the text.

Introduction:

The authors said in the Introduction Section that genipin is a polar compound, so how genipin was obtained in the genipap oil?
In the introduction Section, the authors say that obtaining genipin can be expensive and that there is a need to find more economical ways to obtain the compound. Are there any studies in the literature that involve an economic analysis of the process of obtaining/extracting genipin from genipap? If so, the authors could briefly address this topic in the Introduction.

Materials:

The authors propose a sustainable way to obtain genipin. Why did the authors use chloroform for extraction and not a GRAS solvent? Please provide an explanation for the choice of this solvent.
Please revise the sentence “with a Z content of 98%.” on the following part: Zein (Z) (C-zein, CAS number: 9010-66-6, product number Z3625) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, with a Z content of 98%.
Just to clarify, was the fruit grated in its natural state? Why didn't the author dry the fruits before reducing their size? Please provide an explanation for that in the text.
Why did the authors use Soxleht as an extraction method? Please provide an explanation for that in the text.
Hemolytic activity and Antioxidant activity Section: Which means fruit parts? Please provide information about which part the authors are referring to or state which part of the fruit the authors have studied in each analysis. Were the peel and core studied only for characterization purposes? Please clarify it.
Table 1: Add a column to reference the commercial genipin.

Results:

Table 3. Please provide information about the proximate composition of the peel and core (water, ash, and genipin content).
Table 3 shows that the amount of soluble protein appears to be low compared to the total protein content in the fruit. Please discuss these results in relation to the existing literature.
The use of the terms “core” and “pulp” in the manuscript should be clarified for consistency. It would be helpful to readers if the authors specified whether “core” refers to the endosperm, mesocarp, or a combination of both with seeds, and whether “pulp” is synonymous with “core” or refers to a different part of the fruit. Clarifying these terms or selecting a single one to use consistently throughout the manuscript will increase the clarity and overall understanding of the text.
Figure 2, what about the standard deviation of the data? If possible, include them in the figure.
Table 4. Revise the units used for EC50 (mg/mg DPPH).
There is no need to abbreviate the words “genipin” (GEN) and “caruto oil” (CO). Please use the full forms of these words throughout the text. If authors choose to maintain abbreviated forms, please revise the text consistently and standardize its use. It is currently inconsistent, with some parts of the text using the full form, some using abbreviations, and others using the full form and its abbreviation, which should only happen the first time an abbreviation is included in the text.
Figure 7. Please include any statistical media test (Tuckey, Fisher, or other).

The authors have implemented all suggested improvements, resulting in a significantly enhanced manuscript that is now highly suitable for publication in the RSC Sustainability Journal.