Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors conclude with an important observation regarding the consideration of past land-use practices in the face of extensive monocropping. In light of this observation, the authors might consider relating their findings to the larger field of agroecology and the relationship between agricultural intensification and decreases in biodiversity documented worldwide:

Rindos, D., 1984. The Origins of Agriculture: An Evolutionary Perspective. Academic Press, Orlando.

I would suggest too putting more emphasis on details of the "traditional agricultural system" that they discuss and to provide specific policy recommendations for how “to preserve the knowhow and societal patterns of past communities for future generations.” How do the authors propose to “preserve and commemorate” past agricultural practices similar to those of “other historical monuments”? Are the authors proposing something radical like the eradication of “mechanized modern agriculture” in favor of less-intensive more-biodiverse forms of agriculture? It might be worth considering the downside of “massive monocropping and associated impacts of erosion, pollution of hydrological systems from pesticides and fertilizers, and crop failures due to extremes in weather conditions and invasive pest species. In terms of sustainability and human-environmental relations, agronomists, agricultural engineers, and policy makers may conclude that it is beneficial and risk-averse to promote more ecologically diverse farming practices (see Tittonell et al., 2020)” (Siegel & Pearsall, 2023. J. Archaeol. Sci. 160, 105859).

Tittonell et al. 2020. Agroecology in large scale farming — a research agenda. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4, 584605. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.584605.

Following my recommendations may make for a longer paper. Alternatively, if the demographic trends detailed in the manuscript have been documented elsewhere perhaps those other studies could be referenced instead of presenting them again in the current paper.

Figure 2 was not included in the paper.

I recommend that the paper be published taking into consideration my comments.

Author Response

January 22, 2025

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you for your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript “Historical Roots of Heritage Horticulture in the Southern Coastal Plain of Israel”. Your feedback and constructive comments have been invaluable in improving our work. This response letter addresses each of your suggestions and concerns, and provides detailed explanations of the revisions. We believe these improvements have strengthened the manuscript, and we hope that the revised version meets your expectations. In the point-by-point responses below, the original remarks appear in italics.

Reviewer 1:

The authors conclude with an important observation regarding the consideration of past land-use practices in the face of extensive monocropping. Consider relating findings to the larger field of agroecology and the relationship between agricultural intensification and decreases in biodiversity documented worldwide: Rindos, D., 1984. The Origins of Agriculture: An Evolutionary Perspective.

 

Put more emphasis on details of the "traditional agricultural system" discussed and provide specific policy recommendations for how “to preserve the knowhow and societal patterns of past communities for future generations.” How do the authors propose to “preserve and commemorate” past agricultural practices similar to those of “other historical monuments”? Are the authors proposing something radical like the eradication of “mechanized modern agriculture” in favor of less-intensive more-biodiverse forms of agriculture? It might be worth considering the downside of “massive monocropping and associated impacts of erosion, pollution of hydrological systems from pesticides and fertilizers, and crop failures due to extremes in weather conditions and invasive pest species.

We have added details on the steps needed to preserve traditional agriculture in Israel’s southern coastal plain that include research, public participation and educational initiatives. This article does not deal directly with agroecology or alternative modes of cultivation.

In terms of sustainability and human-environmental relations, agronomists, agricultural engineers, and policy makers may conclude that it is beneficial and risk-averse to promote more ecologically diverse farming practices (see Siegel & Pearsall, 2023. J. Archaeol. Sci. 160, 105859; Tittonell et al. 2020. Agroecology in large scale farming — a research agenda).

 

If the demographic trends detailed in the manuscript have been documented elsewhere perhaps those other studies could be referenced instead of presenting them again.

We are not aware of any research in which the demographic data discussed here are documented in one place in a satisfactory way. We think the presentation of the data here is crucial for understanding the connection between population growth and the extension of cultivated land. 

 

Figure 2 was not included in the paper.

Done, it was omitted by mistake.

 

We confirm that neither the manuscript nor any parts of its content are currently under consideration for publication with or published in another journal. All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to Land.

We remain at your disposal for any further modifications you may feel necessary and hope that the manuscript is now suitable for publication.

Sincerely

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is an interesting investigation into land use, the ways in which it is mapped and the importance of horticulture in the southern Coastal Plain of Israel. It provides us with historical knowledge and an inventory of cartographic supports on the importance of agricultural activity and its repercussions on the settlement of the population.

It provides information and contributions that allow us to understand the development of the activity over time, with evidence in documentary sources with historical and methodological value.

In terms of structure and formatting, the authors should check the form of citation, the identification of figures and tables and the explicit indication of sources, in accordance with the journal's rules.

In the introduction, they should be more explicit about the objectives of the research and the way the article is organized, promoting indications of their contributions to the analysis of the territory and its dynamics, as well as the contributions of new knowledge on the subject under study.

They should check the figures, particularly the maps, in order to indicate their fundamental elements (scale, orientation, titles and legends).

The methodology requires further development and a more detailed explanation of the path followed, given the research objectives. An infogram or diagram of the methodology would be very useful.

The conclusion should be an autonomous point and promote the contributions made in the research and point to paths and solutions that could lead to territorial sustainability.

Author Response

January 22, 2025

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you for your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript “Historical Roots of Heritage Horticulture in the Southern Coastal Plain of Israel”. Your feedback and constructive comments have been invaluable in improving our work. This response letter addresses each of your suggestions and concerns, and provides detailed explanations of the revisions. We believe these improvements have strengthened the manuscript, and we hope that the revised version meets your expectations. In the point-by-point responses below, the original remarks appear in italics.

Reviewer 2

Check the form of citation, the identification of figures and tables and the explicit indication of sources, in accordance with the journal's rules.

We have revised the format of the article to comply with the journal’s specifications.

 

In the introduction, be more explicit about the objectives of the research and the way the article is organized, promoting indications of the authors’ contributions to the analysis of the territory and its dynamics, as well as the contributions of new knowledge on the subject under study.

Done by moving a few paragraphs from the conclusion to the introduction and adding clarifications to better explain the goals and the main findings.

 

Check the figures, particularly the maps, in order to indicate their fundamental elements (scale, orientation, titles and legends).

Done and corrected.

 

The methodology requires further development and a more detailed explanation of the path followed, given the research objectives. An infogram or diagram of the methodology would be very useful.

We have revised the methodology section and added explanations and clarifications on the nature of the research in light of the research objectives.

  

The conclusion should be an autonomous point and promote the contributions made in the research and point to paths and solutions that could lead to territorial sustainability.

We have revised the conclusion to better clarify the importance of the study and to suggest future directions for research and action. We do not deal directly with sustainability in this article.

 

We confirm that neither the manuscript nor any parts of its content are currently under consideration for publication with or published in another journal. All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to Land.

We remain at your disposal for any further modifications you may feel necessary and hope that the manuscript is now suitable for publication.

Sincerely

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Line 467: 'rational' should be changed to 'rationale.'

Otherwise, the authors have satisfactorily addressed my comments on the first submission.