Characterization of the Cattle Production Systems in the Department of Cundinamarca (Colombia), Proposals for Sustainability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The presented manuscript of the article has an interesting topic that represents cattle productivity (meat and milk) in Colombia, and probably applies to other countries in this climatic and geographical region of the world.

I have the following notes to the authors:

1. To present the breed composition in the considered regions, as well as the technology of cultivation, feeding and insemination (natural or artificial). This is very important when looking at cattle productivity.

2. To propose specific actions to increase cattle production in each specific region, such as - creating pastures suitable for the given climatic features, introducing artificial insemination with certain breeds or importing animals in order to improve animal productivity. It is not excluded to consider the state policy regarding this industry in the country and what could be improved in it to increase the yield of meat and milk per unit of area.

Author Response

Dear reviewer 1,

We would like to resubmit the manuscript entitled “CHARACTERIZATION OF THE CATTLE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CUNDINAMARCA (COLOMBIA). PROPOSALS FOR SUSTAINABILITY” for publication in “Sustainability”.

 

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Jaime Fabián Cruz

Alberto Horcada

José María Castel

Yolanda Mena

 

Reviewer # 1

The presented manuscript of the article has an interesting topic that represents cattle productivity (meat and milk) in Colombia, and probably applies to other countries in this climatic and geographical region of the world.

I have the following notes to the authors:

• Request:

 

To present the breed composition in the considered regions, as well as the technology of cultivation, feeding and insemination (natural or artificial). This is very important when looking at cattle productivity.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 605-612: “This has been a first basic work, but it is advisable to continue working, obtaining data on important aspects of the system such as technology, feeding, reproductive management (including possibilities of using artificial insemination), economy, and also of environmental and social aspects, in order to deeper into the sustainability of production systems. Proposing increases in production, changes in the breeds used, or making simple comparisons with systems developed in other geographical latitudes, with different topography, soils and even cultural customs could generate unsustainable livestock systems.”

 

• Request:

 

To propose specific actions to increase cattle production in each specific region, such as - creating pastures suitable for the given climatic features, introducing artificial insemination with certain breeds or importing animals in order to improve animal productivity. It is not excluded to consider the state policy regarding this industry in the country and what could be improved in it to increase the yield of meat and milk per unit of area.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 612-629: “In an attempt to transform weaknesses into strengths, based on this characterization, solutions must begin to be built to promote employment, income and environmental conservation. In this sense, the conservation of biodiversity, encouraging the planting of trees with the implementation of silvopastoral systems, carrying out forage conservation, the associative working and giving added value to the products generated by these systems could be some of the necessary steps to ensure greater sustainability of the systems, due to the high social impacts, economic and environmental impacts that they can generate.

The study revealed a potential for creation of differentiated beef and milk products form the clusters identified, promoting sustainable production systems with possible price premiums for such products. Given Colombia’s current transition to a post-conflict period, incentives to be more productive the rural areas is expected in the following years. These results thus provide a valuable contribution to the literature and for decision makers in the cattle sector, by bringing evidence on the characteristics of livestock systems in Cundinamarca. Therefore, decision makers could promote strategies that clearly combine environmental, production and market aspects to contribute in the up-scaling of a sustainable livestock sector, with an adequate policy framework, control mechanisms and market strategies which include conservation, or restoration safeguards.”

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research, titled “Characterization of the Cattle Production Systems in the Department of Cundinamarca (Colombia). Proposals for Sustainability“ addresses an important and timely topic. I found the subject matter of the article fascinating and read the manuscript with great interest. The paper aligns well with the scope of the journal. However, I believe that in its current form, it has several shortcomings.

This paper aims to analyze bovine production systems in the Department of Cundinamarca, Colombia, as part of a strategic plan to implement sustainable and efficient technological proposals. The study employs multivariate analysis, including principal component, cluster, and variance analysis, to examine descriptive and productive agricultural data from 116 municipalities. Three distinct clusters of bovine production systems were identified: dual-purpose, dairy, and beef production systems. This analysis provides valuable insights into the diversity of bovine production practices in the region, which can inform future development strategies.

 

Strengths of the paper:

 

Comprehensive Analysis: The paper provides a thorough analysis of bovine production systems, considering various quantitative variables and geographic factors.

Cluster Identification: The clustering approach helps categorize municipalities based on their predominant production systems, offering a clear overview of regional diversity.

Strategic Insights: The findings can serve as a foundation for strategic planning and the implementation of targeted interventions to improve bovine production in the Andean region of Colombia.

 

Write a General concept comments highlighting areas of weakness, the testability of the hypothesis, methodological inaccuracies, economics, limitations, implications, literature review, methods, etc.

 

Specific comments:

I recommend rewriting the abstract and including more results and the significance of the obtained data.

Introduction:

The paper lacks an extensive literature review. A more comprehensive review of existing research on bovine production systems in similar regions would provide context for the study and help identify gaps in knowledge.

The paper doesn't explicitly state a hypothesis or research questions. Clearly articulating these would provide a stronger framework for the study and make it easier to assess the research's validity.

Methods:

The methods section could be expanded to provide a more detailed description of data collection processes, statistical analyses, and variables used. This would enhance the transparency and replicability of the study.

Line 171: please consider citing 10.3390/ani12141740 to justify the use of PCA analysis in order to reduce the number of variables 171 and the dimensions of the problem.

Line 175: please consider citing 10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104537 to justify the use of the Kaiser-174 Meyer-Olkin test and Bartlett's sphericity tests.

Line 177: please consider citing 10.3390/ani10122386 to justify the use of cluster analysis.

Line 180: please consider citing 10.1016/j.rvsc.2023.03.008 to justify the use of the Tukey test.

 

Could you please clarify whether you conducted tests for normality and homogeneity on your data before proceeding with the statistical analysis? It's crucial to ensure that the assumptions underlying your chosen statistical methods are met. I recommend referring to the guidelines outlined in [proposed reference, e.g., 10.1080/1828051X.2020.1827990] for conducting such tests to maintain the rigor and reliability of your analysis.

Explain how the data were presented and whether any transformations or adjustments were made to the raw data. Clarify how outliers, if any, were handled in the analysis.

To facilitate transparency and future research, consider sharing the data and detailed methodology used in this study.

Discussion:

Starting the discussion section by reiterating the aim of the study can provide clarity and context for readers.

Given that the study touches on various aspects of bovine production, including milk and meat production, it would be beneficial to include some economic analysis. How do these different systems perform economically? Are there economic implications for farmers in each cluster?

While the paper discusses the clusters identified, it could benefit from a discussion of how these findings could be practically applied to improve bovine production systems in the region.

The limitations of the study should be discussed in more detail, including any potential biases in data collection or analysis. Additionally, the implications of the findings for policymakers, farmers, and researchers should be explored.

The paper could conclude with a section on avenues for future research. What questions remain unanswered by this study, and how could subsequent research build on these findings?

Conclusion:

 

I kindly suggest expanding the conclusions section of your paper to provide a more detailed and comprehensive report of the main findings. This will help readers better understand the significance of your research.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2

 

We would like to resubmit the manuscript entitled “CHARACTERIZATION OF THE CATTLE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CUNDINAMARCA (COLOMBIA). PROPOSALS FOR SUSTAINABILITY” for publication in “Sustainability”.

 

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

 

Reviewer #2

 

Specific comments:

• Request:

 

I recommend rewriting the abstract and including more results and the significance of the obtained data.

 

• Response:

 

New results were included in the abstract, trying to keep a maximum 250 words.

Ln  21- 37:  “Cluster 1, representative of the dual-purpose activity, made up of 48 medium-climate municipalities, 64.6% of the municipal farms correspond to dual-purpose production with an average farm size of 5.2 ha, a carrying capacity of 1.2 UGM/ha and milk production per cow of 7.75 l/d; Cluster 2, made up of 36 cold-climate municipalities dedicated mainly to dairy production on farms (65.9%) of approximately 3.8 ha, with a carrying capacity of 2.3 UGM/ha and milk production per cow of 14.34 l/d.; and Cluster 3, with 32 warm-climate municipalities dedicated mainly to beef production on farms. In this cluster, 66.6% of the farms correspond to beef production of approximately 8.5 ha, with a carrying capacity of 1.2 UGM/ha and milk production of 6.35 l/d. Colombia's climatic diversity and the wide range of bovine livestock activities are among the main strengths to take advantage of the systems. However, the low technological development in the majority of bovine livestock farms, which is related to variables such as low carrying capacity, as in clusters 1 and 3, and with the low employment generated by bovine production in Colombia, are opportunities to improve the livestock industry. It is advisable to continue working, obtaining data on important aspects of the system such as technology, nutrition, reproductive management (including artificial insemination), the economy, and also environmental and social aspects, to delve deeper into the sustainability of productive systems.”

 

• Request:

 

Introduction:

The paper lacks an extensive literature review. A more comprehensive review of existing research on bovine production systems in similar regions would provide context for the study and help identify gaps in knowledge.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 45- 50: “However, interesting studies on specific sectors have been carried out in relation to bovine production systems. For example, Toro et al. [2] studied the pastoral beef systems in Chile using a multivariate analysis, Nahed et al. [3] studied the sustainability of conventional and organic dairy cattle production units in Mexico; Vilaboa et al. [4] studied dual-purpose cattle also in Mexico; Ruviaro et al. [5] studied different feed management in the beef production in Brazil”

 

• Request:

 

The paper doesn't explicitly state a hypothesis or research questions. Clearly articulating these would provide a stronger framework for the study and make it easier to assess the research's validity.

 

• Response:

 

This type of research, which intends to improve the existing knowledge about some production systems and classify them, does not usually involve a hypothesis to refute or confirm. However, since it is important to reinforce the framework in which the research is done, we have included the following in the text:

 

Ln 170-173:  “Given the complexity and diversity of the existing beef production systems in Cundinamarca, and in order to make a diagnosis, it is necessary to simplify this reality through the use of quantitative variables that provide precise information and allow its classification.”

 

• Request:

 

Methods:

The methods section could be expanded to provide a more detailed description of data collection processes, statistical analyses, and variables used. This would enhance the transparency and replicability of the study.

Line 171: please consider citing 10.3390/ani12141740 to justify the use of PCA analysis in order to reduce the number of variables 171 and the dimensions of the problem.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 188-197: “The purpose of PCA is to reduce the number of variables and the dimensions of the problem [22] [31]. The process of selecting variables in the PCA is the following: 12 variables were discarded because his low variability coefficient and therefore little discriminatory capacity. After 21 variables were also discarded because are correlated with other variables considered by the authors to be more important for defining the production system. With the remaining 8 variables, the authors tested the possible grouping of variables in different number of principal components or dimensions (5, 4 or 3). The optimal results are obtained with 4 PCs (in the sense of discriminating and explaining the maximum variance), following the criterion of eigenvalues greater than one [32] [33].”

Ln 179-771: [31]        «Raspa, F., Tarantola, M., Muca, E., Bergero, D., Soglia, D., Cavallini, D., Vervuert, I., Bordin, C., De Palo, P., Valle, E. Does Feeding Management Make a Difference to Behavioural Activities andWelfare of Horses Reared for Meat Production? Animals 2022, 12, 1740. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12141740».

 

• Request:

 

Line 175: please consider citing 10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104537 to justify the use of the Kaiser-174 Meyer-Olkin test and Bartlett's sphericity tests.

 

• Response:

 

The research group reviewed the data again and adjusted the response to what we considered a better statistical procedure. Check the lines from 188 to 230.

 

• Request:

 

Line 177: please consider citing 10.3390/ani10122386 to justify the use of cluster analysis.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 201-207: “In this case, the k-means analysis which is based on the Euclidean distance for grouping, using the 4 PC obtained, was better than the hierarchical analysis because the authors knew the approximate number of clusters that can be obtained from this type of productive systems. In any case, tests were also performed with a hierarchical cluster analysis and the results were identical (3 clusters were obtained). For a larger number of clusters, the ANOVA significance level is greater than 0.05 for at least one of the principal components [22] [32] [35] [36]”

 

Ln 779-781: [35]        «Sardi, L. Gastaldo, A., Borciani, M., Bertolini, A., Musi, V., Garavaldi, A., Martelli, G., Cavallini, D., Nannoni, E. Pre-Slaughter Sources of Fresh Meat Quality Variation: The Case of Heavy Pigs Intended for Protected Designation of Origin Products. Animals. 2020, (10) 2386; Doi:10.3390/ani10122386».

[36]     «Castel JM, Mena Y, Ruiz FA, Camuñez-Ruiz J, Sánchez-Rodriguez M. Changes occuring in dairy goat production systems in less favoured areas of Spain. 2011. Small Rumin Res 93: 83-92».

 

• Request:

 

Line 180: please consider citing 10.1016/j.rvsc.2023.03.008 to justify the use of the Tukey test.

Could you please clarify whether you conducted tests for normality and homogeneity on your data before proceeding with the statistical analysis? It's crucial to ensure that the assumptions underlying your chosen statistical methods are met. I recommend referring to the guidelines outlined in [proposed reference, e.g., 10.1080/1828051X.2020.1827990] for conducting such tests to maintain the rigor and reliability of your analysis.

Explain how the data were presented and whether any transformations or adjustments were made to the raw data. Clarify how outliers, if any, were handled in the analysis.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 209-229: “The assumptions of homogeneity have been verified by Levene Test [2], where equality of variance between groups was rejected (p<0.05). To carry out the equality of means test was used robust statistics Welch and Brown-Forsythe tests, appropriate in the case of unequal variances. These tests reject the equality of means for each factor (p<0.05) comparing their means in the three clusters. The post-hoc comparison tests of means were carried out using the Games-Howell statistic, commonly used when the variances are not equal. The Tukey HSD statistic has been used to contrast homogeneities when the possibility of the existence of homogeneous subsets defined by the three clusters [37]. For each of the factors, the following results were obtained: (i) For Factor 1, clusters 1 and 2 were homogeneous, and clusters 2 and 3 were homogeneous. Therefore cluster 2 exerts of link between 1 and 3; (ii) For both Factor 2 and Factor 3, none of the three clusters were homogeneous among themselves; (iii) For Factor 4, clusters 1 and 3 were homogeneous, and clusters 2 and 3 were homogeneous, therefore cluster 3 is a kind of link bridge between 1 and 2.

In relation to the assumption of normality of the variables involved in the analysis, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test has been used [38]. In the case of the 4 variables (factors) in cluster 1, only the normality of factor 4 is rejected. In the case of the 4 variables in cluster 2, the normality of factors 1 and 4 is rejected. In the case of the 4 variables in cluster 3, the normality of factor 1 is rejected. Therefore, although normality is not met for all the variables involved in the analysis, but for a majority, and given that were used robust statistics to carry out the ANOVA, the results of analysis were considered to be valid”.

 

Ln 587-589: [2]          «Toro-Mujica P, Vera R, Vargas-Bello-Pérez E, Pinedo P, Bas F. Trends and Drivers of Change of Pastoral Beef Production Systems in a Mediterranean-Temperate Climate Zone of Chile. 2019. Animals (Basel). Dec 12;9(12):1135. doi: 10.3390/ani9121135. PMID: 31842505; PMCID: PMC6941165.».

Ln 784-786: [37]        «Masebo, N., Marliani, G., Cavallini, D., Accorsi, P., Di Pietro, M., Beltrame, A., Gentile, A., Jacinto, J. Health and welfare assessment of beef cattle during the adaptation period in a specialized commercial fattening unit. Research in Veterinary Science 2023 (158) 50–55.».

Ln 787-789: [38]        «Cuevas-Reyes, V., and C. Rosales-Nieto. Caracterización del sistema bovino doble propósito en el noroeste de México: productores, recursos y problemática. 2018. Revista MVZ Córdoba 29: 50–56. https://doi.org/10.21897/rmvz. 1240.».

 

• Request:

 

To facilitate transparency and future research, consider sharing the data and detailed methodology used in this study.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 173-179: “Based on the livestock information of the 116 municipalities collected in the administrative sources, it was made a selection of the descriptive variables in the municipalities, followed by a selection of the productive variables related to bovine activity in the study area. The 41 variables finally selected are shown in the Appendix. 23 variables correspond to the general agricultural features of the municipalities, 11 to the inventory by municipality and 7 to the productive information of bovine livestock by municipality”.

 

Ln 182-188: “The quantitative variables were characterized by descriptive statistics and their coefficient of variation (Appendix: Supplementary Table S1), and all the variables were transformed to Z points before being subjected to a multivariate analysis. The data on the variables were subjected to multivariate analysis in two stages: principal component analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA). PCA transforms the data on the diagnostic variables studied into a small set of new synthetic variables – principal components (PC) – with little loss of information”.

 

Other considerations: From lines 163 to 168, the data sources where the information for the present study was obtained were cited. These sources are public accessible.

 

• Request:

 

Discussion:

Starting the discussion section by reiterating the aim of the study can provide clarity and context for readers.

Given that the study touches on various aspects of bovine production, including milk and meat production, it would be beneficial to include some economic analysis. How do these different systems perform economically? Are there economic implications for farmers in each cluster?

 

• Response:

Because this study corresponds to very basic aspects of the System, economic variables have not been included. It is convenient that future studies include these variables to obtain the net images of the farms and the availability of family income. This will allow us to analyze the possibility of survival and continuity of the farms. At the same time, variables linked to the environment and sociology must be included to study the sustainability of the systems as a whole.

 

Ln 382-385: “As described, this work aims to help knowing the cattle production systems in Cundinamarca (Colombia), as a base strategy for future decision-making to improve or reorient livestock activity of the Department, towards socially, economically and environmentally-sustainable processes”.

 

Ln 392-393: “where producers provide raw materials (milk or fat cattle) to the markets of the city or town”.

 

• Request:

 

While the paper discusses the clusters identified, it could benefit from a discussion of how these findings could be practically applied to improve bovine production systems in the region.

 

• Response:

 

Ln 490-497: “For double purpose systems in Colombia, González-Quintero [51] et al found that in medium and large size farms were associated with better infrastructure, and better livestock management practices, however, this was not reflected in an improvement of productive parameters. Authors considered producers need to improve plan their livestock activity, with the purpose of increasing their productivity and developing strategies to mitigate their negative impacts on environment. Information obtained of the productive system can guide to establish policies and programs for their technological improvement [38] [52], as in the present research”.

 

Ln 541:549: “The milk producers were classified as specialized dairy, family-owned dairy farms or small scale dairy and dual-purpose cattle or tropical dairy [55] [56]. Small-scale and Family-owned dairy farms are important for food security [57]. The results of the present research, provide important information related with the characteristics of the cluster 2, for authorities to support efficient technological models and promote policies to improve the dairy systems. The adoption of technology could be affected by factors such as farm size, availability of capital and labour, education, and land ownership, but training is, therefore, essential to contribute to achieve an effective impact on sustainable rural development in areas of Cundinamarca where dairy production are competitive [58]”

 

Ln 569-579: “Most beef farms in Colombia are managed under low-input grazing systems. Cattle mainly graze on natural pastures, usually overgrazed, which leads on degradation soils, water resources, and deforestation, where the animals receive limited supplementation of forages and concentrates, and have low productivity (daily gain weight <0.5 kg per day) and stocking densities lower than 0.5 Animal Unit (A.U) per ha (1 A.U = 454 kg) [51] [62] [63]. The systems of cluster 3 might have a competitive advantage in market niches that demand quality and “natural animal products”, associated with perceived positive ecosystem services and landscape conservation, if the government, community and private sector impulse the replace of extensive pasture lands with agrosilvopastoral systems that integrate crops, trees, pastures and livestock, according to goals established by the nation to reduce green house gases (GHG) emissions and to promote sustainable livestock systems [64]”.

 

The following references have been included:

[38]     «Cuevas-Reyes, V., and C. Rosales-Nieto. Caracterización del sistema bovino doble propósito en el noroeste de México: productores, recursos y problemática. 2018. Revista MVZ Córdoba 29: 50–56. https://doi.org/10.21897/rmvz. 1240.».

[51]     «González-Quintero, R., Barahona-Rosales, R., Bolívar-Vergara, D., Chirinda, N., Arango, J., Pantévez, H., Correa-Londoño, G., Sánchez-Pinzón, S. Technical and environmental characterization of dual-purpose cattle farms and ways of improving production: A case study in Colombia. 2020. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice. 10:19. 14 p.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13570-020-00170-5».

[52]     «Cortés-Mora, J.A., A. Cotes-Torres, and J.M. Cotes-Torres. Avances en clasificación de sistemas de producción con bovinos doble propósito en Colombia. 2014. Archivos de zootecnia 63: 559–562.».

[55]     «Castillo, D., Tapia, M., Brunett, L., Marquéz, O., Terán, O., & Espinosa, E. Evaluation of social, economic and productive sustainability of two agroecosystems of small-scale milk production at the Amecameca Municipality, Mexico. 2012. Revista Científica UDO Agrícola, 12(3),690-704. Retrieved from http:// udoagricola.orgfree.com/V12N3UDOAg/V12N- 3Castillo690.pdf».

[56]     «Hernández, P., Estrada-Flores, J.G., Avilés-Nova, F., Yong-Angel, G., López-González, F., Solís-Méndez, A.D., & Castelán-Ortega, O.A. Typification of smallholder dairy system in the south of the state of Mexico. 2013. Universidad y Ciencia, 29(1),19-31. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_ arttext&pid=S0186-29792013000100003».

[57]     «García, C.G.M., Dorward, P., & Rehman, T. Farm and socioeconomic characteristics of smallholder milk producers and their influence on technology adoption in Central Mexico. 2012. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 44(6),1199–1211. doi: 10.1007/ s11250-011-0058-0».

[58]     «Nivia_Osuna, A., Marentes_Barrantes, D. Small-scale milk production systems in Colombia: a regional analysis of a potential strategy for providing food security. 2020. Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture and Society 8 (4) December. DOI:10.17170/kobra-202010131948.».

[62]     «Zuluaga A, Etter A, Nepstad D, Chara´ J, Stickler C, Warren M. Colombia’s pathway to a more sustainable cattle sector: A spatial multi-criteria analysis. 2021. Land use policy. 109: 105596. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2021.105596».

[63]     «Dávalos LM, Holmes JS, Rodríguez N, Armenteras D. Demand for beef is unrelated to pasture expansion in northwestern Amazonia. 2014. Biol Conserv. 170: 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON. 2013.12.018».

[64]     «Parodi A, Valencia-Salazar S, Loboguerrero AM, Martı´nez-Baro´n D, Murgueitio E, Vázquez-Rowe I. The sustainable transformation of the Colombian cattle sector: Assessing its circularity. 2022. PLOS Clim 1(10): e0000074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pclm.0000074».

 

• Request:

 

The limitations of the study should be discussed in more detail, including any potential biases in data collection or analysis. Additionally, the implications of the findings for policymakers, farmers, and researchers should be explored.

The paper could conclude with a section on avenues for future research. What questions remain unanswered by this study, and how could subsequent research build on these findings?

 

• Response:

 

605-629: “This has been a first basic work, but it is advisable to continue working, obtaining data on important aspects of the system such as technology, feeding, reproductive management (including possibilities of using artificial insemination), economy, and also of environmental and social aspects, in order to deeper into the sustainability of production systems. Proposing increases in production, changes in the breeds used, or making simple comparisons with systems developed in other geographical latitudes, with different topography, soils and even cultural customs could generate unsustainable livestock systems. In an attempt to transform weaknesses into strengths, based on this characterization, solutions must begin to be built to promote employment, income and environmental conservation. In this sense, the conservation of biodiversity, encouraging the planting of trees with the implementation of silvopastoral systems, carrying out forage conservation, the associative working and giving added value to the products generated by these systems could be some of the necessary steps to ensure greater sustainability of the systems, due to the high social impacts, economic and environmental impacts that they can generate.

The study revealed a potential for creation of differentiated beef and milk products form the clusters identified, promoting sustainable production systems with possible price premiums for such products. Given Colombia’s current transition to a post-conflict period, incentives to be more productive the rural areas is expected in the following years [67]. These results thus provide a valuable contribution to the literature and for decision makers in the cattle sector, by bringing evidence on the characteristics of livestock systems in Cundinamarca. Therefore, decision makers could promote strategies that clearly combine environmental, production and market aspects to contribute in the up-scaling of a sustainable livestock sector, with an adequate policy framework, control mechanisms and market strategies which include conservation, or restoration safeguards”

 

• Request:

 

Conclusion:

I kindly suggest expanding the conclusions section of your paper to provide a more detailed and comprehensive report of the main findings. This will help readers better understand the significance of your research.

 

• Response:

Ln 636-655: “This study contributes to generate information about the cattle systems in Colombia and proposes a novel classification of the cattle production systems in Cundinamarca department. There, cattle raising is the main livestock activity which drives economic development in this area, while other livestock activities such as sheep farming, goat farming, horse production, backyard pig farming or backyard poultry farming are marginal.

Based on the grouping of municipalities according to the characteristics of cattle farms, three models of production were identified corresponding to dual purpose, milk and beef production, in to medium, cold and warm climate areas, respectively. According to the three models of production identified in the clearly-defined geographical areas of the department of Cundinamarca, it is possible to form a more realistic picture of the current level of intensification of bovine productive systems, and from there, begin to identify problems and solutions that farmers, decision makers and experts can propose for its improvement and sustainability over time. The updated description of the livestock system in the Cundinamarca region provided, could help both official and private organizations to take key decisions for livestock development in Colombia. It is advisable to continue working, obtaining data on important aspects of the system such as technology, feeding, reproductive management (including possibilities of using artificial insemination), economy, and also of environmental and social aspects, in order to deeper into the sustainability of production systems”

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

The data and information describe in the present document is very important and potentially applied for many authorities and academics to improve or take decisions about animal production systems and their effect on the  Colombia's environment, particularly Cundinamarca province.

Please, check all comments add into the document to improve and clear the information.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3

 

We would like to resubmit the manuscript entitled “CHARACTERIZATION OF THE CATTLE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CUNDINAMARCA (COLOMBIA). PROPOSALS FOR SUSTAINABILITY” for publication in “Sustainability”.

 

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

 

Reviewer # 3

 

• Request:

 

The data and information describe in the present document is very important and potentially applied for many authorities and academics to improve or take decisions about animal production systems and their effect on the Colombia’s environment, particularly Cundinamarca province.

Please, check all comments add into the document to improve and clear the information.

 

• Response:

 

We have carefully considered the comments of reviewer and have incorporated the suggestions into the revised text. All the changes that have been made to the manuscript

Ln 155. Change (16,3%) by (16.3%)

 

Figure 3. Change “CP” by “PC” described in line 186

 

Ln 297. Change “between” by “among”

 

Ln 338. Table 5. “Why not, this table #5 is the first table?????”. Table 5 is the result of the entire characterization process shown in the document. For this reason we consider that it is not possible to present the result without the procedure.

 

Ln 429. “Check the redaction”.  No significant differences were found between the municipal areas destined for grasslands, showing the clusters a general average of 50.1%.

 

Ln 444. “Why not describe family name??”. Sarmiento et al. [41] and Jaramillo et al. [42] report that this is due to the lack of generational replacement.

 

Ln 536. “decimal dot or decimal comma??????”. The average number of cattle per farm (31.8) was significantly different (P<0.05) in the municipalities classified in cluster 2 compared to those in clusters 1 and 3.

 

Ln 583. “Talk in third person”. Based on the productive characterization of the sector, it is possible to get a better picture of the characteristics and intensification of bovine productive systems in the department of Cundinamarca.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

 

I wanted to extend my heartfelt congratulations to you and your team for the outstanding job you've done in revising your paper. I am genuinely impressed by the way you have meticulously incorporated the suggested revisions. Your commitment to improving the article's quality is evident, and I must say that the final result is nothing short of exceptional. The transformation from the initial draft to the current version is remarkable and a testament to your dedication to excellence.