Indigenous Knowledge and Traditional Uses of Vangueria infausta subsp. infausta Burch in Northern KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper describes a small study into the use of Vangueria infausta for both food and medicinal applications in a local community in Northern Kwazulu-Natal.  The rationale is clear, methodology appropriate and results clearly presented. The discussion requires some attention.  The first part of the discussion suggests that the women in the >55 age group have a wider knowledge of the use of this plant, this is not substantiated by the data, which suggests that it is the younger groups with more knowledge and who use the fruit more widely.  The discussion around wider societal issues is clear and supported by the literature, but the link to the data presented is not as clear.  The discussion needs to link the data obtained more closely to the discussions and conclusions. I would also suggest clarifying local terms for the wider audience eg. 'mielie meal'

I have attached the file with some errors to correct in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Point 1: The article entitled: Assessing Genetic Variation Among Strychnos spinosa Lam. 2 Morphotypes using SSR markers, presents an analysis of 14 molecular markers of the SSR type in 32 morphotypes of Strychnos spinosa. The article is correctly stated, the introduction really frames the available knowledge and the results section clearly states the result obtained by using this type of molecular markers.

 Response 1: The comment was well received

 

Point 2: For this reviewer, the only question remains is related to how the primers used were developed, whether they were developed from some isolation strategy of the species of interest or were taken from previous reports in an interspecific manner, in which case it would be desirable to provide evidence of the sequence of the amplicons to be sure that a microsatellite region is being amplified.

 Response 2: Limited options were available since so little genetics work has been done on the species. The option was to develop species-specific microsatellite markers from whole genome data by sequencing one or two of the samples on the PacBio system and mining the data for markers. We opted to mine for approximately 20 tetra nucleotide microsatellite markers. However, not all of the microsatellites were informative. Only 19 were good candidates and this was followed by primer simplex. This helped to show us if the markers were informative and can detect sufficient genetic variability.

 

Point 3: The discussion refers to previous work in Guava but does not specify the origin of the primers used.

Response 3: A range in the allele size from 140−407 (Table 1) among the 32 studied Strychnos spinosa morphotypes was similar to a range from 140−550 among Psidium genotypes in New Delhi, which were however developed from microsatellites enriched libraries [18]. Although the range is similar, but the primers used for these species were different

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General Impression

This is a well-organized and valuable ethnobotanical study documenting traditional knowledge on Vangueria infausta(wild medlar) in Oyemeni, South Africa. The manuscript highlights the plant’s food, medicinal, spiritual, and practical uses, with an emphasis on gendered knowledge transmission. The data is rich, and the tables are informative, contributing significantly to underutilized species research.

Strengths

1. Relevance: The study addresses biodiversity, food security, and cultural heritage, aligning with global conservation and sustainability goals.

2. Depth of Local Knowledge: The paper provides detailed documentation of both culinary and medicinal uses, which is rare and commendable.

3. Gender and Age Analysis: Inclusion of demographic variation enhances the cultural interpretation of knowledge.

4. Ethical Considerations: Ethics approval and consent processes are appropriately described.

Areas for Improvement

1. Language and Style

• The manuscript would benefit from professional language editing. Several minor grammatical issues and awkward phrasings reduce clarity.

  • E.g.: “This pattern was also observed in the age groups 18‒34 and 35‒54 years…” → “This pattern also persisted in the 18–34 and 35–54 age groups…”

  • Avoid redundancies such as “youngest age group” when age categories are defined.

  • Use neutral, scientifically accurate terms (e.g., replace “claimed medicinal value” with “reported” or “traditionally believed”).

2. Structure

• Abstract: Well-rounded but contains overly complex sentences. Consider simplifying to improve impact and clarity.

• Figures/Tables: Tables 1 and 2 are information-dense; consider splitting or using infographics.

• Results vs. Discussion: Occasionally overlap—evaluative commentary should be reserved for the Discussion section.

3. References

• Overall relevant and recent. However, citation formatting needs consistency (avoid mixing styles like [12]; [14]).

• Avoid over-reliance on a single source (e.g., citation [3]); aim for a more balanced literature base.

4. Scientific Rigor

• While the ethnobotanical content is solid, nutritional or medicinal properties must be framed cautiously when lacking empirical data.

5. Conclusion

• Strengthen the conclusion by linking findings to broader implications (e.g., policy, food security, commercialization).

• Include clearer next steps (e.g., phytochemical studies, collaborations with local authorities).

Specific Suggestions

• Line 91: Rephrase “should not be removed” → “are traditionally not removed due to their perceived protective value.”

• Line 214: Revise anecdotal phrasing in veterinary uses—prefer “traditionally believed to support livestock reproductive health.”

• Line 573: Replace “school curricula” with “educational curricula at local schools and community outreach initiatives.”

Additionally, the revisions I would like to request are noted in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comment 1: Line 3, Carefully check the information from https://powo.science.kew.org/

Response 1: Checked and spelling has been corrected from “Bursch” to “Burch”.

 

Abstract

Comment 2: Line 9, Carefully check the information from https://powo.science.kew.org/

Response 2: Confirmed.

 

Keywords

Comment 3: Line 23, Carefully check the information from https://powo.science.kew.org/

Response 3: Confirmed.

 

Introduction

Comment 4: Line 31, Carefully check the information from https://powo.science.kew.org/

Response 4: Confirmed.

 

Results

Comment 5: Line 74, Kindly ensure that the journal template is followed.

Response 5: Heading 2 has been formatted, that first letter of each word is capitalized.

 

Comment 6: Line 100, Move Table 1 to immediately after its first mention.

Response 6: Table 1 has been moved.

 

Comment 7: Line 193, Carefully check all percentages in the table, including those in Table 1.

Response 7: All percentages have been checked and corrected where applicable.

 

Comment 8: Table 2, The letter ‘N’ Should be added before the bracket to correspond with the results in the table.

Response 8: Positioning of letter N has been adjusted.

 

Comment 9: Table 2, Why are whole numbers used instead of decimals?

Response 9: Considering the reviewer’s comment on the tables being dense, using decimals would increase the density and make it difficult to read tables. Since it is impossible to split them, they were kept with the whole numbers.

 

Comment 10: Table 2, The percentages do not add up to 100%.

Response 10: All percentages on both tables were re calculated and corrections have been made where required.

 

Comment 11: Table 2, The percentages add up to more than 100%,

Response 11: All percentages on both tables were re calculated and corrections have been made where required.

 

Materials and methods

Comment 12: Line 509, The map should indicate altitude and scale.

Response 12: A map with altitude and scale have been included on the map.

 

Comment 13: Line 517, Remove this text and insert the ethics number in the appropriate place.

Response 13: Text has been removed, and the ethics number is at the Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate section.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx