Soil Indicators of Terroir and Their Importance for Adaptive and Sustainable Viticulture

Comments 2: Question 2: Page 4. It is necessary to indicate the specific sources of the data in Table 1, and explain the meaning of the average and the symbols in the corresponding values, as well as what the indicator of the last frost in spring specifically refers to.

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have new texts:

 Line 147: Four large regions, which cover the entire territory of the Crimean Peninsula, have, according to long-term data [44, 47], significant agroclimatic differences (Table 1).

Table 1: Frosts (last of spring) = Date Frosts (last of spring)

Line 152: *Average t (I), °C - Average January temperature, °C (with significant variation in the region and its range).**Q is annual energy costs for pedogenesis [46].

Comments 4: Question 4: Page 7, line 228. The corresponding Figure 1 for this paragraph was not found in the manuscript.

Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out.

This is not true: Figure 1 was introduced earlier (this is the 2nd mention)

 line 228: Mediterranean conditions (4 sections, including virgin steppe and primary forest) (Figure 1).

Line 167: Figure 1.

Comments 5: Question 5: Page 8, line 252-263. The Q and HI mentioned in this paragraph have already appeared in Table 1 of Section 2.1, and some corresponding explanations are repeated.

Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out.

Indeed, line 252-258 provides an explanation of these parameters, in terms of how they were calculated and what information they provide. The authors believe that this is necessary for understanding. Table 1 contains only their numerical values.

Comments 6: Question 6: Page 18, line 596. It is suggested to indicate which subgraph of Figure 3 it is, and there should be corresponding explanations in the text after labeling it in the figure. And the two images in Figure 3 (a) only differ in labeling; why not label them on one image?

Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out. The figure has been corrected.

L 638-642:

 Figure 3. Results of geomagnetic survey of ancient (4^th – 3^rd c. BC) land plot for perennial plantings (1.2 km north-east of the town of Kalos Limen (4^th c. BC – 2^nd c. AD) (a) and results of deciphering the land survey system of 4500 m² [51] (b); Stratigraphic trench 70 m long across the plantation walls (red arrow) (a, c); Coastal zone in the north of Tarkhankut Peninsula, where ancient vineyard was planted (section 29) and virgin soil was identified (section 30) (d).

Comments 7: Question 7: Is it necessary to dedicate a separate section to the study of "Anthrosols of Ancient Viticulture", and where is the correlation between the preceding and following text reflected

Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out.

3.3. Anthrosols of Ancient Viticulture. This section is fundamentally important for understanding the objects of study (these are soils with No. 29, 31,32, 34,39, 40 (NW) and 36, 37, 41, 44, 52 (SW) turbated in ancient times), as well as for land management systems that allowed identifying these objects. On this information basis, the materials in the section are presented: 3.7.2. Biogeochemical Features of Soils of the South-Western Crimea.

Comments 8: Question 8: Before formally analyzing the agrophysical characteristics, magnetic susceptibility, and agrichemical indicators of soil, it is recommended to provide a brief overview of the significance of analyzing these indicators. Similar to the processing method used in the analysis of biogeographical features.

Response 8: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Corrected:

3.6. Agrochemical Indicators of Postagrogenic and Virgin Soils

L 723-725 : The main physical and chemical characteristics determine the potential fertility resources of soils, while mobile forms of nutrients (N, P, K) and essential microelements characterize the effective fertility of soils.

Corrected:

 3.5. Magnetic susceptibility of soils

L 693-696: Magnetic susceptibility is a physical indicator for assessing the amount of paramagnetic substances, which is widely used to characterize the pedogenic processes and inherited lithogenic features, but besides that it is attractive for its complexity in reflecting specific physical, chemical and mineralogical properties of soils.

Comments 9: Question 9: The conclusions should be reformulated, and the conclusions should comprehensively summarize the research results as much as possible, and correspond to the research objectives proposed in the introduction and the actual indicators analyzed in the manuscript.

Response 9: Thank you for pointing this out.

 The authors do not fully agree that the objectives of the study do not correspond with Section 4. Conclusions. Three interrelated tasks defined the general goal. The first and third tasks are reflected in L 943-946 and L 947-955, respectively. Task 2: ( to establish through a comparison of vineyard terroir the reasons for the differences in the role of viticulture and winemaking in the economy of the two compared regions, known from ancient sources;). This is reflected in the Abstract (L 10-17), and the Authors have avoided repetition. However, we have added a new sentence about this in 4. Conclusions:

946… as part of the wine terroir. Line 963-966

The two compared historical regions of viticulture, both in ancient times and now, differed in the probability of frost danger, but as we have established, the biogeochemical properties of soils and rocks determined the differences in the volume and quality of wine products, which are known from historical sources and preserved to this day.

Comments 10: Question 10: The manuscript needs language, grammar and syntactic editing. The English language usage should be checked by a fluent English speaker. Grammar and syntax of narrative can be checked and smoothened, accordingly. 

Response 10: Thank you for pointing this out.

 Final quality editing of English has been carried out.

Comments 11. Question 11: The analysis in 3.4 shows that the size of soil particles and the skeleton content have a significant impact on the fertility of soil for grapes. What are the reasons for this impact? What effect do the soil particles have on the potential moisture transfer? It is recommended to read and refer to the article https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.106865 .

Response11: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

Line 568-576

The difference in soil density along the profile, as well as the presence of capillary and non-capillary pores in it, causes non-uniform water movement and different depths of wetting [Luo-24, Zhang-25]. The value of soil moisture capacity depends mainly on its granulometric composition and structure. Soils that were originally rocky or subjected to plantation cultivation contain more than 10% of the skeleton (angular fragments of rocks with a diameter of 0.1-1 cm), have special water-physical and thermal properties, they have low moisture capacity and are well drained. Grape plantings on weakly and medium-skeletal soils (with a content of particles larger than 3 mm from 1 to 30%) are durable, yield a high yield of good quality.

Luo, Y., Wen, T., Lin, X., Chen, X., Shao, L. Quantitative analysis of pore-size influence on granite residual soil permeability using CT scanning. J. Hydrology 2024, 645, 132133. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132133

Zhang, X., Huang, T., Ge, Z., Man, T., Huppert, H. E. Infiltration characteristics of slurries in porous media based on the coupled Lattice-Boltzmann discrete element method. Computers and Geotechnics 2025, 177, 106865. doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.106865

Comments 12: Question 12: Pay more attention to formatting, e.g. The expression of units in the text is inconsistent, some units are represented by slashes (such as mg/kg), while others are represented by superscripts (such as g cm^-3)； There are too many indicators listed in some tables, resulting in incomplete display of values in one row. It is recommended to appropriately split or adjust the layout of these tables to ensure clear presentation and ease of understanding of the data. After the full English name and the acronym are first given in the main text, only the acronym should be used subsequently without repeating the full name. Should lines 730 and 731 on page 2 be deleted? Please check the full text carefully.

Response 12: Thank you for pointing this out.

The authors made substitutions (instead of mg/kg (n=24) became mg kg^-1).

Lines 730 and 731 on page 2 were deleted

·         Comments 2: What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered?

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out.

The practical significance of the study is that it substantiates the ampelopedological prerequisites for the formation of specific taste qualities of wines depending on the geochemistry of the places where the grapevine grows, which allows for the identification of viticulture regions, providing a protected geographical indication of the wine products produced. The environmental assessments carried out by the authors showed that in the agroecological monitoring system, the priority elements for monitoring the content of heavy metals in grape soils are Cu, Cr, Ni, since they are the ones that exceed environmental standards earlier than others (20-25 years after planting the vineyard). 

Comments 4.1

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS IN THE MARGINS OF THE FILE FROM REVIEWER #2.

1.show the aims of the study

Response 4.1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

The authors believe that the goal was formulated in L 10-15:

The comparison of equally important prerequisites of viticulture development (climatope and edaphotope) for its two historical regions has shown that both in the antique era and nowadays less favorable conditions of temperate climate (riskier in terms of frost danger) and poorer biogeochemical properties of soils and rocks in the steppe region compared to the conditions of the sub-Mediterranean region had a decisive influence on the volume and quality of wine products.

Comments 4.2:

2.Keywords: sustainable viticulture; adaptive plant-growing; terroir; soil biogeochemistry

You must try to conclude the study, and not show more doubts to the reader

Response 4.2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

L.  33-34

Keywords: adaptive plant-growing; ampelo-ecological conditions, soil biogeochemistry, soil pollution

Comments 4.3:

Response 4.3: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

L 27-30:

The authors see prospects for further studies both in improving methods for assessing components of a wine terroir, especially biogeochemical indicators of soils for a specific geographic region, and in the technology for obtaining conjugate assessments of viticulture products and wine materials associated with a given edaphotope.

2.      Comments 2: Specific data on soil indicators needs to be listed in section 2.4

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

The above section 2.4, which is related only to Physical Indicators of Soils, of course does not generalize all soil indicators. They are further disclosed:2.5. Specific Magnetic Susceptibility of Soils

2.6. Agrochemical Indicators of Soils

2.7. Geochemical Composition and Indicators of Soils

4.      Comments 4: The data in Table 7 should not be divided into two rows, please modify it

Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

Corrected.

5.      Comments 5: Non English characters appear in lines 730-731 and the specific content of Table 4 is missing. Please make the necessary modifications

Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

Corrected.

Comments 6

6.      Simplify research conclusions and highlight the main research findings

Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out.

The authors followed the international standard for the conclusions section. Three interrelated tasks defined the general goal. The first and third tasks are reflected in L 943-946 and L 947-955, respectively. Task 2: (to establish through a comparison of vineyard terroir the reasons for the differences in the role of viticulture and winemaking in the economy of the two compared regions, known from ancient sources;). This is reflected in the Abstract (L 10-17), and the Authors have avoided repetition. However, we have added a new sentence about this in 4. Conclusions:

Line 946… as part of the wine terroir.

Line 1007-1010: The two compared historical regions of viticulture, both in ancient times and now, differed in the probability of frost danger, but as we have established, the biogeochemical properties of soils and rocks determined the differences in the volume and quality of wine products, which are known from historical sources and preserved to this day.

Comments 2:  Are the objectives of the study clearly stated? Is there a specific hypothesis the study is testing?

1.      Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

L 137-141:

The hypothesis of the study was the question: Could the conditions of edaphotope (biogeochemical properties of soils and rocks), in addition to climate, contribute to the more successful development of viticulture in the Sub-Mediterranean region compared to the expansion of the industry in the ancient era in a region with conditions of temperate climate?

3.      Comments 4 The introduction lacks a comprehensive review of existing literature regarding terroir analysis in viticulture, specifically in the context of soil biogeochemistry. Strengthen the introduction by including more citations regarding previous research on terroir, soil properties, and their impact on wine quality. Literature https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132133,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132006 can help.

Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. The reviewer is absolutely right and the Authors would like to cover these important issues more fully in this Article. However, this was previously reflected and we could not increase self-citation, adhering to the editorial policy of the journal. In particular, this Article:

Lisetskii F.N., Buryak Z.A., Ukrainskiy P.A. Geoinformation analysis of climatic conditionality of soil formation in the territory of the Crimea peninsula. InterCarto. InterGIS. GIS support of sustainable development of territories: Proceedings of the International conference. Moscow: MSU, Faculty of Geography, 2024. V. 30. Part 2. P. 153–170. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2024-2-30-153-170 .

We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have modified text

Line 587-595 :

The difference in soil density along the profile, as well as the presence of capillary and non-capillary pores in it, causes non-uniform water movement and different depths of wetting [Luo-24, Zhang-25]. The value of soil moisture capacity depends mainly on its granulometric composition and structure. Soils that were originally rocky or subjected to plantation cultivation contain more than 10% of the skeleton (angular fragments of rocks with a diameter of 0.1-1 cm), have special water-physical and thermal properties, they have low moisture capacity and are well drained. Grape plantings on weakly and medium-skeletal soils (with a content of particles larger than 3 mm from 1 to 30%) are durable, yield a high yield of good quality.

Luo, Y., Wen, T., Lin, X., Chen, X., & Shao, L. (2024). Quantitative analysis of pore-size influence on granite residual soil permeability using CT scanning. Journal of Hydrology, 645, 132133. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132133

Zhang, X., Huang, T., Ge, Z., Man, T., & Huppert, H. E. (2025). Infiltration characteristics of slurries in porous media based on the coupled Lattice-Boltzmann discrete element method. Computers and Geotechnics, 177, 106865. DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2024.106865

4.      Comments 5 : Provide more detailed descriptions of soil sampling methods, including the number of samples taken, sampling depths, and the criteria used for selecting sampling locations.

Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

Soil sampling points were shown with two different colored punches: Figure 1. Coast of Western Crimea with main (blue circles) and additional (red circles) soil sampling points on fallow lands of different periods and on their virgin analogues (a);

But we also added text:

L 225: The total number of soil sampling points was 23, including 15 in the southwestern part and 8 in the northwestern part of the Western Crimea (Figure 1, а).

L 222:

Now: 236-239

Prior to conducting field research, territories with signs of ancient land use and suitable for soil sampling were identified based on high-resolution satellite images, geomagnetic survey data, and a soil map. The boundaries of nature reserves were determined based on a database of specially protected areas.

L 229:

Now: L 241-258

In accordance with the instructions for conducting a soil survey, within the identified genetic horizons, a sample was taken in the most typical place in a 10 cm layer in height, and in virgin soils in the sod horizon (Ad) and separately in the A horizon, in postagrogenic soils below the sod horizon. The main horizon of the field study was the humus-accumulative horizon (horizon A), from which a sample below the sod-forming horizon (on average 3.5±0.3 (1.5-4.7) cm) to the lower boundary of horizon A (on average 20.4±1.8 (16÷33) cm) was taken for the chemical analysis. Air-dried soil samples were subjected to sample preparation to obtain a sample after sieving through a 0.25 mm diameter sieve (to determine total nitrogen and labile humus, as well as for Corg with subsequent selection of roots with an ebonite stick) and through a 1 mm diameter sieve (for other chemical analyses).

5.      Comments 6: The methods section lacks detailed descriptions of the analytical procedures used. Provide details on the methods, the precision and detection limits for all analyses performed.

Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out.  The authors, after section 2.3. Field Stage of Soil Study, described the methods used in sufficient detail (sections 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7 on L 263-346), with references to standard methods, and the emphasis was on original methodological approaches.

Comments 2: Can you justify the specific selection of soil parameters used for terroir classification? Were any parameters omitted due to practical constraints? How did you account for potential human-induced variability in soil characteristics due to ancient viticulture practices

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out.

There is not only a large specialized scientific literature on soil justifications of terroir, but also practical instructions for soil survey. The authors used these results when organizing the study. As our 10 Tables show, we practically used the main arsenal of parameters, and since the logic was in comparing two regions (NW and SW coasts) with different climates, as a result, differences in the edaphotopes of these two terroirs were established (sections 3.7.1. 3.7.2). The features of viticulture in the historical areas of the studied region were reflected earlier, we could not re-involve these data:

Article: Lisetskii F. N., Zelenskaya E. Ya. Ampelopedological peculiarities of geographical areas of Crimea viticulture // Eurasian Soil Science, 2022, Vol. 55, No. 12, pp. 1770–1785). DOI: 10.1134/S1064229322700065.

Comments 4:  You mention terroir as a combination of soil and climate influences, but many researchers argue that biological factors (microbiota, root interactions) play an equally significant role. Why were these aspects not considered in your study?

Response 4:

Thanks to the Reviewer for such a valuable comment, with which the authors fully agree. But since we focused on the soil prerequisites for the formation of terroir, and we believe that the significance of the biological factor is more clearly manifested in the connection of the microclimate and terrestrial biota, which, for example, is shown by the phenomenon of such a type of wine as Sherry, we did not touch upon these aspects (this is the topic of a separate study). The region we studied has a database of yeast cultures of the "collection of winemaking microorganisms"; throughout all the years of its existence (about 130 years), the method of transplanted cultures (subcultivation) has been used; in practice, sherry wine materials are used with strains.

Nevertheless, following the recommendation of the Reviewer, the Authors made an addition to:

L91-99:

The biogeocenosis of vineyards includes mesofauna and soil microbial communities [Franco24], which, along with abiotic components of the soil, should form a more holistic idea of the interaction of climatope and edaphotope in the development of regional viticulture. Microbiological processes in soils are important in the cycle of nutrients and the decomposition of pollutants, which affects the growth functions of the grape plant and is vital for soil health, but the microbiota associated with the main product (berries) has differences in geographical origin and genetic characteristics [Legras-2014], largely determining the specificity of a given terroir.

Franco, G.C.; Leiva, J.; Nand, S.; Lee, D.M.; Hajkowski, M.; Dick, K.; Withers, B.; Soto, L.; Mingoa, B.-R.; Acholonu, M.; Hutchins, A.; Neely, L.; Anand, A. Soil Microbial Communities and Wine Terroir: Research Gaps and Data Needs. Foods 2024, 13, 2475. doi: 10.3390/foods13162475

Legras, J.L., Erny, C., Charpentier, C. Population structure and comparative genome hybridization of European flor yeast reveal a unique group of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains with few gene duplications in their genome. PloS one, 2014, 9(10), e108089.

Comments 5: Did you perform a principal component analysis (PCA) or another multivariate technique to identify the most influential soil variables for terroir classification?

Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. What statistical methods were used to determine the significance of differences between the two study regions?

The answer to this question is determined by the specifics of the data set. First, the sample size is insufficient to effectively use the proposed methods. The authors agree with the opinion (Bandalos & Boehm-Kaufman, 2009) that the required sample size depends on the number of factors, the number of variables associated with each factor, and how well the set of factors explains the variance of the variables. The second important thing to say is that the choice of variables was not based on formal quantitative indicators of influence. Such indicators are indirect evidence of the presence of influence. The indicators for which the physical or physiological mechanism of influence is known and described were selected.

Bandalos, D. L. and M. R. Boehm-Kaufman. 2009. "Four Common Misconceptions in Exploratory Factor Analysis". In Statistical and Methodological Myths and Urban Legends, edited by C. E. Lance and R. J. Vandenberg, 61–87. New York: Routledge.

L342-345: We obtained the integral soil quality (SQ) estimate. The integral soil quality (SQ) score was obtained using the Storie formula [72], which takes into account the contribution of limiting factors when calculating the geometric mean, and was successfully applied to soil rating [73].

SQ = (X₁*X₂*...*Xn)^1/n. These results are reflected in Tables 6 and 7.

Tables 6 and 7, on the recommendation of the Reviewer, now include values for grape soils.

The authors added to the text:

Line 1014-1017:

The mean values for the 95% confidence interval, which in Tables 6 and 7 were calculated only for grape soils, were subsequently used to determine the classification similarity of objects according to soil biogeochemistry and to assess the contribution of such a key terroir factor as geographic location.

The classification similarity of objects was determined by interpreting the results of cluster analysis (Ward's method, Euclidean distance, values normalized by the standard deviation).

The authors added to the text:

Line 1018-1027 :

The results of the hierarchical classification (Figure 5) taking into account the biogeochemical specificity of grape soils determined by the concentration of 11 chemical elements (excluding chlorine due to values LOD) clearly divide the studied objects by the factor of geographical localization. The first cluster includes all objects from the northwestern part of Western Crimea (No. 29-32, 34, 39, 40), while all objects from the southwestern part of the region form (with a threshold distance of about 16) the second combined cluster. Grape soils of the second cluster, in comparison with the soils of the first cluster, by the value of excess of average concentrations by more than 1.2 times, are characterized by biogeochemical specificity, which is demonstrated by the following ranked descending series: Cu > Si > P > Fe > (Mg, Mn) > Zn > (Ni, K).

Figure 5. Dendrogram of hierarchical classification Ward’s method, Euclidean distance) of postagrogenic soils and modern grape soils from the northwestern and southwestern coasts of Western Crimea.

The authors added to the text:

Line 1033-1042:

Non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance (NP MANOVA), which was performed according to Anderson's method [Anderson-2001] using Mahalanobis distance and 999 permutations, showed that grape soils of two regions of Western Crimea statistically differ in concentration of macroelements and trace elements. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05), which were substantiated using Mann-Whitney test, allowed to establish that grape soils of two regions of Western Crimea differ in content of 11 chemical elements by an ensemble of seven elements (Si, Fe, Mg, Mn, K, P, Zn), and exceptions were found for content of Ca, Ni, S. Special place in this analysis is occupied by assessment of concentration of Cu, which varies in range of 14-29 mg kg^-1 in soils in northwestern part of the region with significantly greater range of values (from 8 to 306 mg kg^-1) in southwestern part, where sampling included mostly modern vineyards).

Anderson, M.J. A new method for non‐parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral ecology, 2001, 26(1), 32-46.

Non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance NP MANOVA