Review Reports - Improvement of the Methodology for the Assessment of the Agro-Resource Potential of Agricultural Landscapes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A valuable study has been carried out with all its details, and it will make positive contributions to the relevant fields in today's conditions. But in some places, including the abstract, long sentences are used that make the meaning difficult, corrections are recommended.

Author Response

Thank you for comments. We have updated the abstract to include the purpose of the study for clarity. We used long sentences to reveal in more detail the essence of the content of the article. We will send you a revised version of the article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, below are comments related to the review

Keywords with the Abstract should be adapted to the work and not repeated, that is, the abstract should be reformulated.

The text must be checked, for example specifying a reference in line 270, a reference in parentheses in line 278, separating the size from the numerical data in line 288, etc.

In line 297, the expression that should be changed from the formula is specified.

The material and methods are informative and need to be specified, that is, the methods are listed in the Results section, but the results are not specified.

The above conclusions are descriptive and do not give a clear enough picture of what was obtained from the conducted research, but only a statement that could be assumed.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the revised version of the article

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The subject of the study is related to issues related to agricultural activities. After reading the content of the study, I suggest the authors organize and supplement the content in subsections following the comments below:

1. Modify the title of the article to "Improving the methodology for assessing the agricultural and resource potential of agricultural landscapes", because the authors did not explain what the agri-resource potential is

2. The abstract should be supplemented with the purpose of the article.

3. The Introduction chapter should be divided into a part regarding agricultural and resource potential (agricultural resources) and the proposed research approach. In addition, it should be justified why the research approach proposed by the authors, defined as "scientific", is better than competitive ones, which should be included in the introduction.

4. In the introduction, it should be indicated why the topic undertaken by the authors is important and how the research/analyses conducted have expanded knowledge about the problem.

5. Chapter 2 Materials and Methods should be expanded, among others: supplementing with an explanation of the concept of rational and sustainable organization of agricultural land use and management [L100]. Additionally, the adopted research methodology should be explained, which "is based on the laws of nature (what?), principles and approaches of agricultural nature management (what?) [L101-103]

6. Check the correctness of the saved formulas.

7. The Conclusion chapter should be supplemented with limitations of the research/assumptions, as well as implications for those managing agricultural landscapes.

8. The article should be supplemented with a discussion chapter.

9. In the Conclusions chapter, you should describe the authors' further research plans and indicate to whom the research results are addressed. Additionally, it should be mentioned whether the methodology developed by the authors has been tested.

10. The English language requires correction. The text is mainly missing punctuation marks and the articles the, and, etc.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language requires correction. The text is mainly missing punctuation marks and the articles the, and, etc.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the Revised version of the article

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article proposes a methodology for assessment of agro-resource potential of agricultural landscapes, based on four key components (groups of factors).

The research is interesting. However, in the reviewer’s opinion the article could be improved, if the authors agree, on the basis of the following observations:

- The four key components of agro-resource potential of landscapes (????? ) (lines 111-115), derive from Reference [2]?

- It is not clear how the formulas you mention correlate with the mathematical expression 1.

- You mention climate change only in your Conclusions. If the aim is to predict the natural state of agricultural landscapes in the face of climate change you should state it in your Introduction and your Abstract.

- In your Introduction you state that existing methodological approaches are lacking, and you propose an improvement of methodology (more comprehensive methodology). The novelty of research should be highlighted in your Conclusions.

- In your Conclusions you state that your methodology “can be used to prepare a strategic action plan and recommendations in order to minimize the negative impact of unfavorable natural factors on the territorial organization of land use on the landscape basis”. Who can use these “action plan and recommendations”, can they be integrated in a spatial plan for example?

- Are there any limitations in your methodology that should be mentioned? Are all the datasets/factors you mention in your methodology widely available? Only experts can use this methodology?

Also:

- In line 147, 488 and in Line 585, you have the same title: «3.2. Methodology for the assessment of agroclimatic resources of agricultural landscapes». You should change the title in Line 488, as in this Section you analyse agrobiological resources (????). Accordingly in the Section starting in Line 585 you refer to water resources.

- Check your text format.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files