Low Tree Vigor, Free Palmette Training Form, and High Planting Density Increase Olive and Oil Yield Efficiency in Dry, Sloping Areas of Mediterranean Regions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The evaluation of local cultivars regarding their development, olive yield and olive oil quality parameters is of clear importance. In this manuscript, interested work has been done to evaluate in the field three Sicilian cultivars, planted in four different planting systems.

The subject addressed in this article was worthy of investigation with new information presented. From the methodological point of view, the study was made appropriately, and the design was appropriate for the goals stated. The manuscript is adequately supported by relevant reference material. Materials and methods are well presented, and the manuscript is well written with satisfactory English language use. The experimental plan and statistical analysis are adequate.

The validity and significance of the results is important. The authors appropriately discuss their results and conclusions are justified by the results found in the study. The results are novel, provide a significant contribution to the field and could be of potential interest to the olive farming and the olive oil industry.

Some specific comments and suggestions are listed:

1. I recommend changing the title.

The title ‘Sustainable intensive olive growing systems for dry, sloping areas of the Mediterranean regions” does not completely correspond to the work presented. The title should be related to the context of the manuscript. I would be better not to use such a vague title. Use headlines that convey a message – what were the main results; be descriptive - mention the method used and use specific terms rather than general terms.

2. Line 25: Fruit yield per hectare, instead Fruit yield.

3. Line 61: SHD, instead SDH.

4. Line 66-69: Use a reference/s for this statement.

5. Line 79: genetic diversity of the olive tree, instead biodiversity

6. Line 110. 2.1. Plant material and experimental conditions

Information is missing about

a) what was size of the experimental orchard,

b) how many trees were planted from each variety. 

Please add.

7. Line 119: fruits, instead fruit

8. Line 146: Information is missing about what fertilization inputs and soil management was applied in the experimental plots. Was the same for each variety. Please provide information.

9. Line 153. Use photo of the same variety

10. Line 157: 2.2. Experiment layout and measurements

Please provide

a) information about how many replicates.

b) a satellite photo or a drawing of the experimental olive orchard with the plots etc.

11. Line 168. How long it took the olive fruits to be processed after harvest?

12. Line 169: provide the model of the olive mill.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the valuable comments, the manuscript has been significantly improved as a result. A point by point answer to the reviewer's comments follows:

Some specific comments and suggestions are listed:

1. I recommend changing the title.

The title ‘Sustainable intensive olive growing systems for dry, sloping areas of the Mediterranean regions” does not completely correspond to the work presented. The title should be related to the context of the manuscript. I would be better not to use such a vague title. Use headlines that convey a message – what were the main results; be descriptive - mention the method used and use specific terms rather than general terms.

The title has been changed to:

Low tree vigor, free palmette training form and high planting density increase olive and oil yield efficiency in dry, sloping areas of Mediterranean regions

2. Line 25: Fruit yield per hectare, instead Fruit yield.

 changed

3. Line 61: SHD, instead SDH.

 changed

4. Line 66-69: Use a reference/s for this statement.

 8 citations have been added

5. Line 79: genetic diversity of the olive tree, instead biodiversity

 changed

6. Line 110. 2.1. Plant material and experimental conditions

Information is missing about

1. a) what was size of the experimental orchard,
2. b) how many trees were planted from each variety. 

Please add.

 added

7. Line 119: fruits, instead fruit

 changed

8. Line 146: Information is missing about what fertilization inputs and soil management was applied in the experimental plots. Was the same for each variety. Please provide information.

 added

9. Line 153. Use photo of the same variety

 A new photo with all 4 training forms from the same cultivar has been added

10. Line 157: 2.2. Experiment layout and measurements

Please provide

1. information about how many replicates.

Info is already present in the first sentence of section 2.2 (lines 170-171)

1. a satellite photo or a drawing of the experimental olive orchard with the plots etc.

we think a photo is not really needed to understand the experimental layout; however, a photo has been added as supplementary material

11. Line 168. How long it took the olive fruits to be processed after harvest?

added 

12. Line 169: provide the model of the olive mill.

Mill was specifically built for this purpose. Added

Reviewer 2 Report

A very well-written paper on intensive olive growing systems for Italy. The main strengths of this paper are the rigorous data set and analysis of 7 years of yield and quality data on three olive varieties in several modern planting configurations. From the data, it is obvious that the olive variety, Calatina has higher oil yield, fruit yield and yield efficiency due to low tree vigour. There are very few weaknesses in this manuscript. The manuscript can be improved with my suggestions below:

There are nice photos of central leader (CL), free palmette (FP), and globe vase (GL) configurations in Figure 1. It will be good if the authors can also add a photograph of the Poly-conic vase (PV) configuration in Figure 1.

Page 1, Line 20 - Spell out TCSA (Trunk Cross Section Area) the first time this abbreviation is mentioned in the Abstract.

Page 5, Line 228 - Replace 'trees grew always less' with 'trees always grew less'

Author Response

We thank the Reviewer for the good comments and useful suggestions. We have applied all the requested changes as follows:

There are nice photos of central leader (CL), free palmette (FP), and globe vase (GL) configurations in Figure 1. It will be good if the authors can also add a photograph of the Poly-conic vase (PV) configuration in Figure 1.

Since the other Reviewer was asking for the photos to be all from the same cultivar, we have changed the figure with photos of all 4 training forms from the same cultivar

Page 1, Line 20 - Spell out TCSA (Trunk Cross Section Area) the first time this abbreviation is mentioned in the Abstract.

changed

Page 5, Line 228 - Replace 'trees grew always less' with 'trees always grew less'

done