Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Author,

Thanks for your efforts. I suggest you to improve the discussion section by comparing your research and other studies.

 

 

Regards,

Pourya

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It is better but some sections seems that are written by AI. 

Author Response

Please see the attached document with responses to review comments

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Abstract

• The abstract lacks a clear background or justification for the study. A brief introductory sentence explaining why sheep and goat production systems are important in Fiji would help frame the study’s relevance. It looks more like a conclusion stating the results of the study. The abstract would benefit from clearer organization including background, objectives, methods, results, conclusion to enhance clarity.
• The term "structured questionnaire" is used, but no details are provided on the nature or scope of the questionnaire. Please provide more details about it.
• The use of statistical results such as "P <0.05" requires clarification. It is not clear what statistical tests have been used.
• The methods or algorithms used in the study are not clear.

 Introduction

• The text presents Fiji as a relevant context for this research, but the justification could be expanded. Why is Fiji’s small ruminant sector understudied? Are there any recent policy or climate-related changes that make this study timely?
• While the text hints at gaps in breed characterization and consumption data, the core research problem is not clearly stated.
• The literature review part is so short and there is no background of the literature in this section.
• The introduction could benefit from a clearer articulation of the literature gap. What have previous studies overlooked or failed to address? Why is this study a necessary contribution? It is not entirely clear why this study was necessary at this time. Why is breed and consumption data urgently needed in Fiji?
• The introduction would be more complete with a brief concluding sentence outlining the structure of the manuscript.

Materials and Methods

• The environmental description is useful, but it would be more helpful if the link between climate, terrain, and livestock farming were clearer.
• The questionnaire structure is clear, but there’s no mention of how the questions were validated. After pre-testing, were any questions changed?
• It’s good that the questionnaire was translated, but did you do back-translation to ensure accuracy?
• The questionnaire covers key topics, but it would be helpful to mention how questions were formatted, for example, were the responses multiple choice, rating scales, or open-ended?
• The authors mention 270 farmers were surveyed. Please explain how you chose this number.
• Since stratified sampling was used, please clarify whether the number of farmers chosen from each province reflects their population sizes.
• Consider including the full questionnaire as a supplementary file for transparency.

Results

• The Results section is generally well-structured, with clear subsections that logically follow the objectives of the study. However, consider revising the subsection numbering (e.g., 3.3 is repeated twice). This may confuse readers and should be corrected for consistency.
• Consider mentioning the contribution of your work compared to existing literature. Indeed, since the literature part of your study lacks a lot, right now, it is not clear whether these findings are new and add to the literature or not.

Discussion

• The discussion effectively contextualizes the findings. However, some paragraphs attempt to cover too many ideas at once, making them difficult to follow. For instance, the paragraph discussing diseases, veterinary services, and traditional medicine could be broken into smaller sections.
• No reference is made to the limitations of the study, which usually is a critical component of any discussion. Please include a paragraph outlining the limitations of the study and suggestions for future research, especially regarding land tenure, gender dynamics, and seasonal effects.

Conclusions

• The authors might consider briefly highlighting the novelty or contribution of this study in relation to prior work.
• The conclusion does not acknowledge the limitations of the study, nor does it suggest areas for further research. Please consider mentioning them since they would enhance the scholarly value of the work.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for your effort to modify the manuscript.