Farmer Perception of Links between Grassland Diversity and Animal Health in Relation to Farm Structure

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 Sustainability276317. The Farmer-Perceived Links between Grassland Diversity and  Animal Health Are Not Farm Structure-Related.

This paper is well written and the results are well presented and well discussed. Despite the fact that the survey lacks aspects, and it seems that farmers' knowledge of the plant species that have effects on the health of livestock is not deeply investigated.   

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have taken into account  the reviewers' comments in the new version of the document. The comments are indicated in the text under "track changes", and we have responded to them below, following the reviewers' comments. Kind regards

Audrey Michaud

Reviewer 1

This paper is well written and the results are well presented and well discussed. Despite the fact that the survey lacks aspects, and it seems that farmers' knowledge of the plant species that have effects on the health of livestock is not deeply investigated.   

The aim of this initial investigation was to gather farmers' point of views on the link they make between grassland diversity and animal health. This initial investigation identified the main types of link made by farmers. More in-depth surveys of a smaller number of farmers will be carried out to gain a better insight into farmers' perceptions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

A brief summary

The idea of the manuscript is good and it well rewritten but there are few comments below.

Specific comments:

Abstract:

-         Line 16: write (helps in) not (provide on)

Introduction:

-         Line 36: write (over) before (long)

-         Line 60: move (on animals) after (species)

Materials and Methods:

-         Line 146: write (as) not (than)

-         Line 153: what is the type of cattle, is it dairy or beef?

-         Line 156: what is meant by units? Is it heads?

-         Write the ethical approval number

Results:

-         Line 171: write (no) not (of)

-         Line 177-178: write (recorded) not (cited), write (themes) not (qualifiers), change these in the whole manuscript.

-          Line 180-186: the message to reader is not clear, clarify  

-         Line 188-196: the number of responses you mentioned is 98 but the total number of responses is 162? what are the number of responses in the final theme? Clarify

-         Line 202-212: the number of responses is not equal to the number of responses mentioned, clarify

-         Line 215-219: not clear, clarify

-         Table 1: write (description) not (signification)

-         Table 2: move (surveyed) before (farms)

-         Figure 1: write (recorded) not (cited), text is not matched with chart, reset chart

-         Figure 2: write (recorded or perceived)

-         Figure 3:  clarify the meaning of A, B, C charts

-         Figure 5: group 1 region is central France not eastern, check

Discussion:

-         Line 288: write (health) after (animal)

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have taken into account  the reviewers' comments in the new version of the document. The comments are indicated in the text under "track changes", and we have responded to them below, following the reviewers' comments.Kind regards

Audrey Michaud

Reviewer 2

Abstract:

- Line 16: write (helps in) not (provide on)

We changed it line 16

Introduction:

- Line 36: write (over) before (long)

- Line 60: move (on animals) after (species)

We changed it line 36 and line 61

Materials and Methods:

- Line 146: write (as) not (than)

We changed it line 146

- Line 153: what is the type of cattle, is it dairy or beef?

We added few details line 154

-Line 156: what is meant by units? Is it heads?

Livestock units are standardized units for expressing the number of animals: 1 LU is equivalent to 1 dairy cow or 1 suckler cow with its calf.

- Write the ethical approval number

For this study, we didn't need to apply to the ethics committee, since there were no medical or physical measurements on animals or humans. We asked the farmers we interviewed to sign a consent document, which you will find attached (in French and English versions).

Results:

- Line 171: write (no) not (of)

We changed it line 171

- Line 177-178: write (recorded) not (cited), write (themes) not (qualifiers), change these in the whole manuscript.

We changed it line 177 and the word « qualifier » by « theme » in the document.

- Line 180-186: the message to reader is not clear, clarify

We have reworded a sentence to clarify the paragraph (ln 180)

- Line 188-196: the number of responses you mentioned is 98 but the total number of responses is 162? what are the number of responses in the final theme? Clarify

Farmers identified 5 themes to describe a good grassland. They used one or more themes to define it, which explains why the number of responses exceeded the number of farmers who answered to this question. The figure illustrates this point, i.e. represents the number of times a theme was cited. We hadded a sentence to clarify it ln 198.

- Line 202-212: the number of responses is not equal to the number of responses mentioned, clarify

We don't understand the remark: we have a total of 100 responses and a breakdown into 4 categories

- Line 215-219: not clear, clarify

We clarifie dit ln217-224.

- Table 1: write (description) not (signification)

We changed it in Table 1

- Table 2: move (surveyed) before (farms)

We changed it in Table 2

- Figure 1: write (recorded) not (cited), text is not matched with chart, reset chart

We changed it in Figure 1 and rewrited the text on the Figure.

- Figure 2: write (recorded or perceived)

We changed it in Figure 2

- Figure 3:  clarify the meaning of A, B, C charts

We clarified the meaning of A B and C charts in legend of Figure 3

- Figure 5: group 1 region is central France not eastern, check

We don't understand this remark: in Figure 5, the regions are not shown. They are shown in Figure 6a.

Discussion:

- Line 288: write (health) after (animal)

We changed it ln 293

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Interesting paper on link between grassland diversity and animal health.  A lot of interviewing of farmers for the data.

Figure 1: The legend on the x-axis is misplaced and difficult to read when off-set.

Figures 3, 4, and 5 - I am not a statistician and these plots were not explained in the text well. Figure 3 information on plot is hard to read.  Are these plots contributing significantly to the article?

Figure 6 a,b,c - the Y-axis is identified as number of farms, but you have 3 groups across the x-axis, and the total for all three groups is about 100 farms with a different number for each group -- this is not represented in the graphs (for example - my understanding the that group 3 has 100 farms based on graph, which it doesn't)

 Would it be more appropriate to have 'Percentage of farms in the group on the y-axis?'

Line 33 '... livelihoods of a billion of people around the world[1]. ...

Line 50 '... provide grazing livestock with a balanced energy and protein nutrition [8]'...

Line 228 '...mainly western f France, was represented by beef ...'

Thought that the authors might mention the occurrence of phytoestrogens in the different grasses (particularly clovers and alfalfa) with both positive effects (for humans) and often negative effects for animals causing hyper-estrogenism.  Perhaps not a large problem in that geographical area.

Minor suggestions, please see comments above.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have taken into account  the reviewers' comments in the new version of the document. The comments are indicated in the text under "track changes", and we have responded to them below, following the reviewers' comments.Kind regards

Audrey Michaud

Reviewer 3

Figure 1: The legend on the x-axis is misplaced and difficult to read when off-set.

We change it in Figure 1.

Figures 3, 4, and 5 - I am not a statistician and these plots were not explained in the text well. Figure 3 information on plot is hard to read.  Are these plots contributing significantly to the article?

We made correction in Figure 3.

Figure 3 is a multivariate analysis, showing how farmers are positioned in relation to each other according to their response to the 12 variables. Figure 4 shows the positioning of the variables on each axis. The further down a variable is on an axis, the more it helps to discriminate between farmers on that axis according to the methods mentioned in that same variable. The figures 3 show that farmers' responses to the 12 variables are not conditioned by their health/grassland link according to the 3 axes. This led us to target only STRONG farmers and then to carry out a clustering (HCPC; figure 5) on them to study whether farmers were STRONG for different reasons

Figure 6 a,b,c - the Y-axis is identified as number of farms, but you have 3 groups across the x-axis, and the total for all three groups is about 100 farms with a different number for each group -- this is not represented in the graphs (for example - my understanding the that group 3 has 100 farms based on graph, which it doesn't)

We made changes in Figure 6 and proposed « frequency ».

Would it be more appropriate to have 'Percentage of farms in the group on the y-axis?'

This type of result is classically represented in terms of frequency, as the number of farms can vary from one group to another. We propose to keep it that way.

Line 33 '... livelihoods of a billion of people around the world[1]. ...

We change dit ln 33.

Line 50 '... provide grazing livestock with a balanced energy and protein nutrition [8]'...

We change dit ln 50.

Line 228 '...mainly western f France, was represented by beef ...'

We change dit ln 228.

Thought that the authors might mention the occurrence of phytoestrogens in the different grasses (particularly clovers and alfalfa) with both positive effects (for humans) and often negative effects for animals causing hyper-estrogenism.  Perhaps not a large problem in that geographical area.

This type of information was not studied in the survey. One stage of this project involves analyzing the splante compounds present in more or less diversified grasslands: this will be the subject of future results.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf