Review Reports - Biodynamic Viticulture Representations in the French Wine Industry: A Textual Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Abstract

Lines 19-22) The authors should consult with the journal style guide for the accepted methods to present sentences with enumerated articles.

Line 24) “…viewing points…” suggest change to “…viewpoints…”.

Keywords

These should be presented in alphabetical order.

Introduction

Paragraph 1) Reviewer suggests that the text citation to the seminal Steiner et al. (1999) paper be moved to the end of the second sentence (line 36).

Lines 44-45) “…a Demeter cooperative…” more information is needed regarding the definition of a Demeter Cooperative and the genesis of this concept.

Lines 51-52) “…the label…” which label?

Line 85) “…investigate…” change to “…investigated…”.

Line 91) “…compares…” change to “…compared…”. Cited research results should usually be framed in the past tense.

Materials & Methods

Line 147) “…[18],[19]…” suggest moving these citations to where they first apply, earlier in the paragraph.

Results

Line 296) Where is Figure 2?

Line 343) “…convinced…” change to “…are convinced…”.

Line 403) “Table 1” should be relabeled “Table 3”.

Discussion

Lines 608-612) Reviewer suggests combining and reordering these sentences into a single paragraph as follows: “The diverse representations of biodynamics and their coexistence can present an opportunity to foster a new understanding of agriculture during the transition we are currently experiencing. For example, Jean Foyer describes biodynamics as a form of ‘syncretism,’ suggesting that different ways of thinking can lead to new representations and applications [29].”

Line 617) “The Modern worldview…” no new paragraph.

Line 630) “The Traditional worldview…” no new paragraph.

Line 640) “Unfortunately, this worldview…” no new paragraph.

Line 667) “…less susceptible to cryptogamic diseases…” change to “…less susceptible than untreated plants to cryptogamic diseases…”.

Line 685) “However, additional field…” no new paragraph.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments, which help me improve my manuscript. Here are the changes that have been made.

Abstract

Lines 19-22) The authors should consult with the journal style guide for the accepted methods to present sentences with enumerated articles. -> Agree, I changed the enumeration to sentences.

Line 24) “…viewing points…” suggest change to “…viewpoints…”. -> Agree, done

Keywords

These should be presented in alphabetical order.-> Agree, done

Introduction

Paragraph 1) Reviewer suggests that the text citation to the seminal Steiner et al. (1999) paper be moved to the end of the second sentence (line 36).-> Agree, done

Lines 44-45) “…a Demeter cooperative…” more information is needed regarding the definition of a Demeter Cooperative and the genesis of this concept. -> Agree "Following Steiner's lectures, farmers and practitioners gathered to exchange their experiences and promote the methods they had learned. They established common standards and practices, fostering a community dedicated to biodynamic agriculture. Consequently, a cooperative named Demeter was established in Germany to process and market products from biodynamic farms. "

Lines 48-49) “…The brand secured its intellectual property rights…” is “Demeter” trademarked in Europe as a recognized brand? Which intellectual property rights were secured (or was this more of a strategic change?)? Agree -> "Although the Demeter Association was dissolved during the Second World War but was revived in 1946 by the Anthroposophical Farmers' Research Circle [2], which subsequently created a brand that was trademarked in Europe, securing its intellectual property rights in 1954"

Lines 51-52) “…the label…” which label? Agree -> "This federation defines the international standards for the Demeter label, a certification mark for products that are produced according to biodynamic farming principles [3]".

Lines 63-64) “…biodynamic preparations 500, 501, and compost preparations derived from seven plants (nettles, horsetail, dandelion, chamomile, valerian, yarrow, and oak bark)…” suggest the inclusion of a citation to a source that defines and/or specifies these formulations. Agree ->Demeter, Biodynamic Federation, 2020, Biodynamic Preparations, Good Practice Manual, https://demeter.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Demeter-Biodynamic-Preparations-Manual_2020.pdf (Visited on 08/02/2024)

Line 85) “…investigate…” change to “…investigated…”. Agree-> done

Line 91) “…compares…” change to “…compared…”. Cited research results should usually be framed in the past tense. Agree-> done

Materials & Methods

Line 136 – Section on determination of sample sizes) There are many published methods for the imputation of minimum sample size depending on the type of study and data and dynamics of the anticipated dataset. The authors invoke one method for qualitative studies described by Morse. Were other methods considered? The choice of method and the manner of use seems arbitrary. This section would benefit from a stronger case for the Morse method(s). Citing Morse or Guest highlights that both authors (among others, I agree) believe a sample of thirty participants is adequate. The aim is to support the relevance of our sample rather than to debate the various forms of sampling in qualitative research. I added: "Determining the appropriate number of interviewees for statistical robustness in a qualitative study is challenging. Numerous methods exist for estimating the minimum sample size which depend on the type of study, the nature of the and the dynamics of the anticipated dataset. For example, [Morse]...Other authors [Guest]. "

Line 147) “…[18],[19]…” suggest moving these citations to where they first apply, earlier in the paragraph. Agree-> done

Results

Line 296) Where is Figure 2? Lines 280 -> 290 (screenshot for the corpus)

Line 301) Figure 3 lists lexemes with associated frequencies of presence and absence from subject responses. A dendrogram is depicted above the classes (1 to 4) that does not include a basis in terms of statistical distance that supports the presented conclusions regarding clusters. Agree-> "Figure 3 presents the dendrogram obtained by HAC distances between these classes in the form of a dendrogram. In this type of diagram, the groups are connected by branches, and the way these branches join indicates the proximity or distance between the groups. The closer the branches are to the root, the more similar the groups are. In our case, Class 1 appears to stand out from Classes 2, 3, and 4, which form a subgroup. Within this subgroup, Class 2 is distanced from Classes 3 and 4."

Line 343) “…convinced…” change to “…are convinced…” I would like to maintain the enumerative style of the titles that corresponds to that of other classes.

Line 403) “Table 1” should be relabeled “Table 3”. Agree -> done

Discussion

Line 617) “The Modern worldview…” no new paragraph. I wanted to organize the text according to different classes or worldviews

Line 630) “The Traditional worldview…” no new paragraph. I wanted to organize the text according to different classes or worldviews

Line 640) “Unfortunately, this worldview…” no new paragraph. Agree -> done

Line 667) “…less susceptible to cryptogamic diseases…” change to “…less susceptible than untreated plants to cryptogamic diseases…”.Agree -> done

Line 685) “However, additional field…” no new paragraph. Agree -> done

Line 703) This paragraph speaks to the need for the wine industry to embrace field testing of biodynamic methods and materials. The reviewer suggests the addition of “standardization of traits and trait measurement methods to allow for the comparison of datasets over time and terroir.” Agree -> "To assist winemakers in developing their own methods based on solid evidence, it is necessary to define clear hypotheses regarding the effects of biodynamic practices by formulating specific, field-testable scenarios and standardising traits and measurement methods to allow for the comparison of datasets over time and across different terroirs. This involves designing controlled experiments; establishing protocols that include both control and biodynamically treated modalities for comparison; collecting quantitative and qualitative data; including biological measurements and practitioner observations; analysing the collected data using appropriate statistical techniques to determine the significance of the results; and publishing and sharing findings for validation and practical application."

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article titled Biodynamic viticulture representations in the French wine industry: a textual analysis, is a very interesting, informative and comprehensive view on biodynamic viticulture application and perception in the French wine industry. I would like to compliment the authors , I have really enjoyed reading this paper and I would suggest its publication in the current form.

I have only two questions/suggestions:

In lines 165-166, is it 3 or 4 wine regions?
I would suggest putting the list of interview questions in the Suppl. material

Author Response

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your kind comments, and suggestions, which help me improve my manuscript. Here are the changes that have been made.

In lines 165-166, is it 3 or 4 wine regions? Agree -> Four!
I would suggest putting the list of interview questions in the Suppl. material Agree -> I will do it

Thank you again

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the present manuscript, an overview of the various representations of biodynamics within the French wine industry was provided by interviewees and followed analysis, which was quite interesting to the organic winegrowers and winemakers all over the world, but not only in France. It gave us another way to recognize the biodynamic viticulture and oenology. Thus, we were pleased if it would be published successfully in the journal Horticulturae. However, there were still a few type errors or syntax errors in this manuscript. Some comments or suggestions were as following:

1, Line 68, 69 and more, “mg/l” should be revised to “mg/L”;

2, Line 69, the number “2” in “SO2” should be as subscript.

3, In the part of 2.1, we suggested the authors should used more sentences in the past simple tense in English.

4, The formats of some references were not standard and unified.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English was good. But, there were still a few syntax errors in this manuscript, which should be revised before its publication.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments, which help me improve my manuscript. Here are the changes that have been made.

1, Line 68, 69 and more, “mg/l” should be revised to “mg/L”; Agree -> done

2, Line 69, the number “2” in “SO2” should be as subscript. Agree -> done

3, In the part of 2.1, we suggested the authors should used more sentences in the past simple tense in English. Agree -> done

4, The formats of some references were not standard and unified. Agree -> We have edited the references

Additionally, the English has been reviewed by the MDPI translation teams.

Thank you again,

Manuela Brando de Lachapelle