Plant Diversity of Concessions Held by Catholic Religious Groups in Three Cities of the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Manuscript is interesting and deserves to be published. Overall the authors have improved the manuscript a lot and they followed my comments and suggestions (but see below). However, there are still many sentences that have no support in the literature and should be completed by adding some bibliographical references. in fact, many of the concepts reported (e.g., cultural ecosystem services, citizen managers) are not original and, therefore, require some link with the available literature. Here below, some further commets and suggestions. I think that after these minor changes the manuscript now deserves to be published on sustainability. I suggest MINOR REVISIONS.

POINTS

Figures 3, 4, and 5. Please improve the readability. The numbers and words are too much little.

Appendix A. Tab. A1. Scientific names in italic.

About the cultural ecosystem services, authors added a sentence (‘Unlike rural areas, urban biodiversity is fragmented and managed by diverse stakeholders. Recognizing this heterogeneity is key to effective conservation strategies; rows 412-423): however, this sentence should be supported at least by 1-2 references. I suggest some references in the first review but Authors could added some more.

Rows 457 and conclusions. Ok for the sentence added but all these words and statements should be supported by references. I suggest some refs. but authors could add some more. ‘Citizen management’ is a new concept (but not originally developed by the authors) and should be supported by literature.

Reference n. 44 in Bibliography. Not in Capital letters!

Have a nice work.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

A bit improvement could be useful. However good (I am not a Mother Tongue in English but the ms is readable without difficulty).

Author Response

Comment 1:  Figures 3, 4, and 5. Please improve the readability. The numbers and words are too much little.

Response 1: Figures have been improved

Comment 2: Appendix A. Tab. A1. Scientific names in italic.

Response 2: All names were written in italics.

Comment 3: About the cultural ecosystem services, authors added a sentence (‘Unlike rural areas, urban biodiversity is fragmented and managed by diverse stakeholders. Recognizing this heterogeneity is key to effective conservation strategies; rows 412-423): however, this sentence should be supported at least by 1-2 references. I suggest some references in the first review but Authors could added some more.

Response 3: Four relevant references were added

• Bennett, A. F. (2003). Linkages in the landscape: The role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation (IUCN).
• Battisti, Corrado (2024). “Ecological networks as planning tools for African fragmented landscapes: Overcoming weaknesses for an effective connectivity conservation” – African Journal of Ecology 62(1): e13186.
• Savary P., Lessard J.P., Peres-Neto P. R. (2024).Heterogeneous dispersal networks to improve biodiversity science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 39 (3):229-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2023.10.002
• McIntyre S., Hobbs R.(1999). A Framework for Conceptualizing Human Effects on Landscapes and Its Relevance to Management and Research Models. Conservation Biology,13 (6): 1282-1292. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.97509.x.

Comment 4: Rows 457 and conclusions. Ok for the sentence added but all these words and statements should be supported by references. I suggest some refs. but authors could add some more. ‘Citizen management’ is a new concept (but not originally developed by the authors) and should be supported by literature.

Response 4:

As it is not appropriate to include references in the conclusion, we have added a sentence to the discussion about the concept and added references (Row 418-420)

“ Catholics, and religious groups more broadly, including both children and adults, can contribute significantly to conservation by acting as 'citizen manager' of biodiversity [90–93].’’

• Battisti, Corrado; Frank, Beatrice; et Fanelli (2018). “Children as drivers of change: The operational support of young generations to conservation practices” – Environmental Practice 20(4): 129‑135.
• DeGeorges, Paul Andre; Reilly, Brian Kevin (2009). “The Realities of Community-Based Natural Resource Management and Biodiversity Conservation in Sub‑Saharan Africa” – Sustainability 1(3): 734‑788.
• Flynn, Carli; Davidson, Cliff (2016). “Adapting the Social–Ecological System Framework for Urban Stormwater Management: The Case of Green Infrastructure Adoption” – Ecology and Society 21(4).
• Battisti C., Cerfolli (2021). From Citizen Science to Citizen Management: Suggestions for a pervasive fine-grained and operational approach to biodiversity conservation. Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution, 68(1-4), 8-12). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/22244662-bja10029.

Comment 5: Reference n. 44 in Bibliography. Not in Capital letters!

Response 5: The reference was corrected to lower case.

Comments on the Quality of English Language:  A bit improvement could be useful. However good (I am not a Mother Tongue in English but the ms is readable without difficulty).

Response:  The manuscript has been submitted to a native English speaker for improvement.

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

• Table 1 occupies too much space, and it is recommended to change the way of expression.
• It is suggested that Table 2 can be attached as an appendix at the end of the thesis.
• Figures 3, 4, and 5 appear unclear. Please remanufacture them or improve the clarity.
• The hypothesis states that "CRG area influences diversity," but results show no significant correlation. In the introduction, explicitly outline the theoretical basis for the hypothesis (e.g., discussion on the applicability of area-diversity theory).
• The sample sizes differ substantially among cities (40 CRGs in Kisangani, 20 in Bukavu, 10 in Lubumbashi), potentially affecting the statistical power of inter-city comparisons. Explain the reasons for this discrepancy in the methods and assess its impact on results in the discussion.
• While mentioning "systematic full inventories," specify the time period of the inventory (e.g., whether it covers different seasons).
• Lubumbashi has the highest species richness despite the smallest area, linked to the hypothesis of "exotic species introduction in border cities." Supplement with specific socioeconomic data (e.g., trade activities, population mobility) to strengthen causal inference.
• Bukavu lacks native species entirely, while Kisangani and Lubumbashi have a few. Analyze this further by integrating the historical vegetation context (e.g., colonial-era greening policies).
• The suggestion to "promote native species" should be tailored to CRGs’ management patterns (e.g., religious groups’ greening preferences). Propose concrete strategies, such as native species lists or ecological education programs for religious communities.
• For Figure 2 (life form distribution), supplement percentage data instead of absolute counts to facilitate cross-city comparison.

 

Author Response

Comment 1:  Table 1 occupies too much space, and it is recommended to change the way of expression.

Response 1: The table has been reformatted and condensed.

Comment 2:  It is suggested that Table 2 can be attached as an appendix at the end of the thesis.

Response 2: The table has been included as an appendix and placed in the appropriate section.

Comment 3:  Figures 3, 4, and 5 appear unclear. Please remanufacture them or improve the clarity.

Response 3: The clarity of the figures has been enhanced

Comment 3: What "CRG area influences diversity," but results show no significant correlation. In the introduction, explicitly outline the theoretical basis for the hypothesis (e.g., discussion on the applicability of area-diversity theory).

Response 4: Additional explanations were provided in the Introduction and Discussion sections.

Row 99-102: Indeed, according to the species–area theory, species diversity is expected to increase up to a maximum limit [45,46]. In addition, green management typically depends on locally available cultivated or planted species, which are shaped by prevailing climate and dominant vegetation formations [47,48].

Row 371-373: Therefore, reservations must be made regarding the species–area theory for anthropized habitats and human-managed green spaces. The determinants of species diversity in these contexts involve multiple factors that require investigation.

Comment 5:  The sample sizes differ substantially among cities (40 CRGs in Kisangani, 20 in Bukavu, 10 in Lubumbashi), potentially affecting the statistical power of inter-city comparisons. Explain the reasons for this discrepancy in the methods and assess its impact on results in the discussion.

Response 5: Additional explanations were provided in the Methodology and Discussion sections

Row 229-233:  Sampling was influenced by site accessibility (road network), CRG abundance, the time required for vegetation identification and the required substantial logistical efforts. In addition to these constraints, sampling in each city was discontinued once a significant number of new species was no longer recorded, in accordance with the species–area curve [45,46]

Row 329-333:  The number of CRGs samples varied between cities due to differences in accessibility and abundance. Standardizing sample sizes across cities would have been preferable, especially for clustering analyses. However, sampling was adapted based on the widely accepted species–area relationship [45,46]. Furthermore, non-parametric analyses appropriate for unequal sample sizes were employed to minimize potential biases as effectively as possible

Comment 6:  While mentioning "systematic full inventories," specify the time period of the inventory (e.g., whether it covers different seasons).

Response 6: The inventory period was mentioned in the previous paragraph: ‘’ Surveys were conducted during peak vegetation periods between 2023 and 2024, with prior site access permissions and the assistance of master's-level researchers ‘’ (Row 233-234).

Comment 7:  Lubumbashi has the highest species richness despite the smallest area, linked to the hypothesis of "exotic species introduction in border cities." Supplement with specific socioeconomic data (e.g., trade activities, population mobility) to strengthen causal inference.

Response 7: Further content has been incorporated into the Discussion section.

Row 348-352:  Furthermore, the dominance of exotic species in border cities like Bukavu and Lubumbashi likely results from deliberate or accidental plant introductions via trade and human mobility, particularly with neighboring countries such as Rwanda (Bukavu) and Zambia (Lubumbashi, notably for mining-related exchanges). Comparative studies of garden flora across border cities could help clarify the underlying dynamics).

Comment 8:  Bukavu lacks native species entirely, while Kisangani and Lubumbashi have a few. Analyze this further by integrating the historical vegetation context (e.g., colonial-era greening policies).

Response 8: To incorporate the observation, paragraphs have been added to the Discussion section.

Row 353-359: The complete absence of native species in Bukavu likely results from colonial urban planning favoring exotic landscapes and insufficient postcolonial restoration. Indeed, olonial urban planning prioritized sanitary and segregative layouts (e.g., buffer zones, separate quarters) with green spaces modeled on European designs, promoting ornamental exotic species [69]. Postcolonial greening largely continued these horticultural practices. In contrast, Kisangani and Lubumbashi—being near reserves still harboring native flora—retain indigenous species in urban gardens.

Comment 9:  The suggestion to "promote native species" should be tailored to CRGs’ management patterns (e.g., religious groups’ greening preferences). Propose concrete strategies, such as native species lists or ecological education programs for religious communities.

Response 9: To incorporate the observation, a sentence have been added to the Discussion section

Row 423-426: Developing regional catalogs and guides on native species suitable for urban use could incentivize their integration into urban landscaping. To this end, ecological education programs targeting religious communities can be developed.

Comment 10:  For Figure 2 (life form distribution), supplement percentage data instead of absolute counts to facilitate cross-city comparison.

Response 10: The percentages have been added to figure 2.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have no more comments.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a very original manuscript evidencing the role of peculiar sites (Catholic parks) for biodiversity (plant) conservation. Text is well written with a good and fluent English style and language. Methods are good and the manuscript represents a good arrangement about a still poor considered topic, at least in Africa. I suggest only MINOR revision. More in particular, I suggest to improve literatuire cited about: (i) the role of these parks as patches for ecological networks at larger scale; (ii) improve references about diversity indices; (iii) add some sentence in conclusions about the role of stakeholders managing these parks. However a good ms. I like to read a revised version.

POINTS

I suggest to read your topic in a frame of ecological network planning using patches (parks) as stepping stones (see Bennett, A. F. (2003). Linkages in the landscape: the role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation (No. 1), IUCN) useful to the dispersal of for plants. In this regard, see the Editorial on African Journal of Ecology, 62(1), e13186.

About methods, I think that it is better cite some seminal handbooks about diversty indices: see Magurran, A. E. (2013). Measuring biological diversity. John Wiley & Sons.Rows 69-71. Add also the role in improving the cultural ecosystem services (see Land, 11(5), 603 and others).

Row 111. Here I suggest to add citations at least about the few references available.

In Tab. 4 please write the scientific names of genus (and, when reported, of species) in italic font (here and everywhere along the text). In table 5: family names (generally) may be written also not in italic.

Figs. 3-6: good!

Row 356. ‘gardens. [58–‘. Delete point after ‘gardens’.

Row 420. ‘The analysis of the origin status of the species reveals that the majority of species are exotic’. Important statement. It should be better developed in discussion.

In conclusions it could be useful add some sentence on the possible role of catholics as ‘citizen managers’ to protect these ecosystems. They could act (both adults and children) developing small environmental actions to conserve plants in parks (with suggestions about your possible training. See Environmental Practice, 20(4), 129-135; Sustainability, 1(3), 734-788; Ecology and Society, Vol. 21, No. 4, Dec 2016;  Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution, 68(1-4), 8-12).

Add the role of anonymous reviewers in the Acknowledgments.

Have a nice work.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

General Response: The English language of the manuscript has been revised for greater clarity and conciseness. All comments were taken into account during the rephrasing process.

Comment1: I suggest to read your topic in a frame of ecological network planning using patches (parks) as stepping stones (see Bennett, A. F. (2003). Linkages in the landscape: the role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation (No. 1), IUCN) useful to the dispersal of for plants. In this regard, see the Editorial on African Journal of Ecology, 62(1), e13186.

Response 1: The suggestion has been addressed in the Discussion;See line 427-431.

Comment 2: About methods, I think that it is better cite some seminal handbooks about diversty indices: see Magurran, A. E. (2013). Measuring biological diversity. John Wiley & Sons.Rows 69-71. Add also the role in improving the cultural ecosystem services (see Land, 11(5), 603 and others).

Response 2: The suggestion has been addressed. See line 174-176 about Magurran and Line 421-423 about cultural ecosystem services.

Comment 3: Row 111. Here I suggest adding citations at least about the few references available.

Response 3: References have been added. See line 92.

Comment 4: In Tab. 4 please write the scientific names of genus (and, when reported, of species) in italic font (here and everywhere along the text). In table 5: family names (generally) may be written also not in italic.

Response 4:  All corrections have been implemented. See table 4 and table 5.

Comment 5: Figs. 3-6: good!  Row 356. ‘gardens. [58–‘. Delete point after ‘gardens’.

Response 4: All corrections have been implemented.

Comment 6: Row 420. ‘The analysis of the origin status of the species reveals that the majority of species are exotic’. Important statement. It should be better developed in discussion.

Response 6: See line 436-440.

Comment 7: In conclusions it could be useful add some sentence on the possible role of catholics as ‘citizen managers’ to protect these ecosystems. They could act (both adults and children) developing small environmental actions to conserve plants in parks (with suggestions about your possible training. See Environmental Practice, 20(4), 129-135; Sustainability, 1(3), 734-788; Ecology and Society, Vol. 21, No. 4, Dec 2016; Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution, 68(1-4), 8-12).

Response 7: The sentences have been added.See line 464-467.

Comment 8: Add the role of anonymous reviewers in the Acknowledgments.

Response 8: The addition has been made.

Have a nice work.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

L.2-L3: To write in the title "in the cities of the Congo, Democratic Republic" is very ambiguous when only three cities are studying it.

L.37: Replace "quasi-heterogeneity" as it is not a standard concept or as recognized in investigation

L.41-L.42: In the keywords section, avoid using words that are part of the title of the article

L.366: "Near Heterogeneity" is not a standard concept in investigation

L.457/L.377/L.367: Ideas are repetitive

L.367/L.377: These arguments are conclusive, you must attach them to the section "Conclusions"

 

 

L.2-L3: Saying “in the cities of the Congo, Democratic Republic” in the title is very ambiguous when only three cities are being studied.

L.37: Replace “quasi-heterogeneity” as it is not a standard or widely recognized concept in research.

L.41-L.42: In the keywords section, avoid using words that are part of the article title.

L.48: Change the word “conversion” to “modification.”

L.84-85: You can remove the sentence that says “and it is said to a large extent.”

L.112-135: The paragraph is too long; it is recommended that it be divided into at least three paragraphs to make it easier to read.

L.127-135: The text refers to how most of the plants are exotic; I considered adding the names of the most representative plants. L.278: Figure 3: This figure is of low quality; you should include a higher-quality image.

L.288: Figure 4: The figure is of low quality; it is recommended to include higher-quality images.

L.366: “Near Heterogeneity” is not a standard concept in research.

L.457/L.377/L.367: The ideas are repetitive.

L.367/L.377: These arguments are conclusive; you should attach them to the “Conclusions” section.

General comment: All images are noisy; it is recommended to include higher-quality images.

L.458: you could modify this line of text, so that it is more fluid for the reader, example: Kisangani being the only one where the CRGs present greater similarity to each other”

 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Authors must pass ms to a native speaker.

Author Response

General Response: The English language of the manuscript has been revised for greater clarity and conciseness. All comments were taken into account during the rephrasing process.

Comment 1: L.2-L3: To write in the title "in the cities of the Congo, Democratic Republic" is very ambiguous when only three cities are studying it.

Response 1: The title has been improved : “ Plant diversity of concessions held by Catholic religious’ groups in three cities of the Democratic Republic of Congo “

Comment 2: L.37: Replace "quasi-heterogeneity" as it is not a standard concept or as recognized in investigation

Response 2: Standard terms have been used to replace the previous one: "quasi-heterogeneity"

Comment 3: L.41-L.42: In the keywords section, avoid using words that are part of the title of the article

Response 3: The keywords section has been revised.

Comment 4:L.366: "Near Heterogeneity" is not a standard concept in investigation

Response 4: Standard terms have been used.

Comment 5: L.457/L.377/L.367: Ideas are repetitive

Response 5: Modifications have been made to avoid repetitions.

Comment 6: L.367/L.377: These arguments are conclusive, you must attach them to the section "Conclusions"

 Response 6: Modifications have been made.

Comment 7: L.48: Change the word “conversion” to “modification.”

Response 7: Modification have been made.

Comment 8: L.84-85: You can remove the sentence that says “and it is said to a large extent.”

Response 8: The sentence has been removed.

Comment 9: L.112-135: The paragraph is too long; it is recommended that it be divided into at least three paragraphs to make it easier to read.

Response 9: Modifications have been made.

 

Comment 10: L.127-135: The text refers to how most of the plants are exotic; I considered adding the names of the most representative plants. L.278: Figure 3: This figure is of low quality; you should include a higher-quality image.

Response 10: The quality of the figures has been improved.

Comment 11: L.288: Figure 4: The figure is of low quality; it is recommended to include higher-quality images.

Response 11: The quality of the figures has been improved.

Comment 12: L.366: “Near Heterogeneity” is not a standard concept in research.

Response 12: Standard terms have been used.

Comment 13: L.457/L.377/L.367: The ideas are repetitive.

Response 13: Modifications have been made to avoid repetitions.

Comment 14: L.367/L.377: These arguments are conclusive; you should attach them to the “Conclusions” section.

 Response 14: Modifications have been made.

Comment 15: General comment: All images are noisy; it is recommended to include higher-quality images.

Response 15: The quality of the figures has been improved.

Comment 16: L.458: you could modify this line of text, so that it is more fluid for the reader, example: Kisangani being the only one where the CRGs present greater similarity to each other”

Response 16: Modifications have been made.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article sent to me for review addresses the timely and relevant topic of the influence of private entities on urban biodiversity conservation, in the context of dynamic urbanisation and shrinking public green space resources. The authors rightly note that research to date has mainly focused on public land, overlooking the importance of land owned by religious organisations. It should be added that the choice of Catholic Religious Groups (CRGs) as the object of analysis is well motivated, as Catholicism plays a key socio-economic role in the Democratic Republic of Congo and religious communities have significant land resources. Thus, this paper fills an important research gap.

The authors of the study conducted a systematic flora inventory in a random sample of 70 CRGs from three cities, namely Bukavu, Kisangani and Lubumbashi. The area of green spaces, their species composition and biological types were compared.

The authors listed 220 species belonging to 76 families and 185 genera. Species composition varied both within and between cities. Phanerophytes and exotic species predominated. There was no correlation between CRG area and species richness.

 

The introduction to has been carefully constructed and provides a solid background to the research conducted. The authors identify the research gap very well.

I have no objection in principle to the methods. However, the sample size in Lubumbashi (10 CRGs) is low compared to Kisangani (40).

The publication is enriched by clear table data and figures.

The discussion enriches the results by relating them to the literature, including studies from Bangladesh, Jordan, Benin and South Africa. The authors effectively demonstrate that floristic differences are due to climatic-environmental conditions rather than religious factors.

I strongly recommend for publication article. I only ask the authors to refer to the sample size.

Author Response

General Response: The English language of the manuscript has been revised for greater clarity and conciseness. All comments were taken into account during the rephrasing process.

Comments: The introduction to has been carefully constructed and provides a solid background to the research conducted. The authors identify the research gap very well.

I have no objection in principle to the methods. However, the sample size in Lubumbashi (10 CRGs) is low compared to Kisangani (40).

The publication is enriched by clear table data and figures.

The discussion enriches the results by relating them to the literature, including studies from Bangladesh, Jordan, Benin and South Africa. The authors effectively demonstrate that floristic differences are due to climatic-environmental conditions rather than religious factors.

I strongly recommend for publication article. I only ask the authors to refer to the sample size.

Responses: At this stage, we no longer have the logistical means to conduct fieldwork. Given the small sample sizes, non-parametric tests were applied to avoid biasing the results. Additionally, no relationship was observed between CRGs and area covered. Despite the small sample size for Lubumbashi, this city recorded the highest number of species.