Adoption and Impact of Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties within German Viticulture: A Comprehensive Mixed-Methods Study with Producers
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled as “Adoption and Impact of Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties within German Viticulture: A Comprehensive Mixed-Methods Study with Producers” is quite interesting research article which has investigated the factors that support or discourage the cultivation of fungus-resistant grape varieties (FRGV), as well as the challenges and opportunities in marketing.
In the current study authors used an explorative sequential mixed-model design. In the first step, data were collected through 48 in-depth interviews and analyzed. Based on the qualitative results, a survey of 422 producers was conducted. The quantitative research results were segmented by company size and production type to provide a deeper understanding. The main drivers for cultivation are the ecological benefits resulting from the reduction of pesticide use.
Authors have provided the interesting results that will be useful for grape varieties producers. So basically it has been concluded that the cultivation of resistant grape varieties is restricted by a large number of varieties, lack of experience, and unfavorable characteristics from initial generations of resistant grapes. A low level of grape variety prominence and customer awareness, as well as unattractive variety names, negatively affect producer acceptance. To facilitate higher market acceptance, it is important to offer attractive grape varieties, directly communicate them to the consumers, and provide information about the sustainable effects.
The research is important and acceptable for publication but I have some minor issues that authors need to consider.
Introduction
Line 25 “not only reduces CO2 emissions and soil degradation but also enhances biodiversity and”
Please write the CO2 correctly
Materials and Methods
Line 86-87 “Interviews were conducted with 48 wine producers, which, according to Ritchie et al. 86
and Creswell, constitutes an adequate sample size”.
Please follow the Journal citation style for providing the references.
Figure 1. Structure of the sequential exploratory mixed-methods research design (inspired by Berman)
Could you please cite the reference correctly?
Discussion
Line 345-347 “Eisenmann et al. calculated a labour reduction of up to 76% within the plant protection activities and Doye et al. indicates that a reduction in working time of up to 30% is possible, particularly in steep slopes. Vollmer notes that steep”
Please follow the Journal format to cite the references.
Line 357 “for the effects of policies such as CO2 pricing, the green deal of the European Union”
Please correct CO2
Line 373 “ducers, scientists, and other experts, as also stated in a study by Basler. The exchange of”
I suggest to cite the reference number for this reference Basler here.
I would suggest to recheck the citation of references throughout the article particularly in Discussion section.
Could you please add some recent articles from 2024 related to this research in the present paper?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your comprehensive review. Your comments were very helpful and have been fully addressed in the revision.
Comment 1 (Introduction):
Line 25. “not only reduces CO2 emissions and soil degradation but also enhances biodiversity and” -> Please write CO2 correctly.
Response 1:
We have corrected the spelling of CO2 throughout the manuscript to adhere to scientific standards.
Comment 2 (Materials and Methods):
Line 86-87. “Interviews were conducted with 48 wine producers, which, according to Ritchie et al. 86 and Creswell, constitutes an adequate sample size”. -> Please follow the journal citation style for providing the references.
Response 2:
We have accurately cited the reference according to the journal's guidelines.
Comment 3 (Materials and Methods):
Figure 1. Structure of the sequential exploratory mixed-methods research design (inspired by Berman) -> Could you please cite the reference correctly?
Response 3:
We have accurately cited the reference according to the journal's guidelines.
Comment 4 (Discussion):
Line 345-347. “Eisenmann et al. calculated a labour reduction of up to 76% within the plant protection activities and Doye et al. indicates that a reduction in working time of up to 30% is possible, particularly in steep slopes. Vollmer notes that steep” -> Please follow the journal format to cite the references.
Response 4:
We have accurately cited the reference according to the journal's guidelines.
Comment 5 (Discussion):
Line 357. “for the effects of policies such as CO2 pricing, the green deal of the European Union” -> Please correct CO2.
Response 5:
The spelling of CO2 has been corrected.
Comment 6 (Discussion):
Line 373. “ducers, scientists, and other experts, as also stated in a study by Basler. The exchange of” -> I suggest to cite the reference number for this reference Basler here.
Response 6:
We have accurately cited the reference according to the journal's guidelines.
Comment 7:
I would suggest rechecking the citation of references throughout the article, particularly in the Discussion section.
Response 7:
All citations throughout the article, especially in the Discussion section, have been reviewed and adjusted to meet the journal's formatting requirements.
Comment 8:
Could you please add some recent articles from 2024 related to this research in the present paper?
Response 8:
We have added recent articles from 2023/2024 to enhance the relevance and current context of our research. The corresponding references have been included in the literature review and cited in the text.
Burandt, Q. C., Deising, H. B., & Von Tiedemann, A. (2024). Further Limitations of Synthetic Fungicide Use and Expansion of Organic Agriculture in Europe Will Increase the Environmental and Health Risks of Chemical Crop Protection Caused by Copper‐Containing Fungicides. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 43(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5766
Di Vita, G., Califano, G., Raimondo, M., Spina, D., Hamam, M., D’Amico, M., & Caracciolo, F. (2024). From Roots to Leaves: Understanding Consumer Acceptance in Implementing Climate-Resilient Strategies in Viticulture. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research, 2024, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/8118128
Duley, G., Ceci, A. T., Longo, E., & Boselli, E. (2023). Oenological potential of wines produced from disease‐resistant grape cultivars. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 22(4), 2591–2610. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.13155
Kiefer, C., & Szolnoki, G. (2024). Consumer preferences for fungus-resistant grape varieties: An explorative segmentation study in Germany. British Food Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-10-2023-0865
Vecchio, R., Annunziata, A., Parga Dans, E., & Alonso González, P. (2023). Drivers of consumer willingness to pay for sustainable wines: Natural, biodynamic, and organic. Organic Agriculture, 13(2), 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-023-00425-6
Zachmann, L., McCallum, C., & Finger, R. (2024). Determinants of the adoption of fungus-resistant grapevines: Evidence from Switzerland. Journal of Wine Economics, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2023.36
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript titled "Adoption and Impact of Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties within German Viticulture: A Comprehensive Mixed-Methods Study with Producers" by Kiefer and Szolnoki and submitted to sustainability for consideration aims to investigate producers’ perceptions of FRGV, examining the reasons for their reluctance, and identifying the challenges and opportunities for FRGV production and market integration in Germany.
The following comments need to be considered:
- The word "discourage" in line 5 might be unsuitable. I think it is "encourage".
- Many authors throughout the manuscript were mentioned without including references. I suggest including the number of references beside each.
- At the end of the discussion, please briefly answer the three questions mentioned by the end of the introduction to show that the goal of this work has been achieved.
- Please, go through the manuscript for some grammar errors and improving the language.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageSome minor errors were noted that need to be fixed.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have addressed all your suggestions and made the necessary changes.
Comment 1:
The word "discourage" in line 5 might be unsuitable. I think it should be "encourage".
Response 1:
We have replaced "discourage" with "encourage" in line 5 to accurately convey the intended meaning.
Comment 2:
Many authors throughout the manuscript were mentioned without including references. I suggest including the number of references beside each.
Response 2:
We have included reference numbers alongside each mentioned author to ensure proper citation.
Comment 3:
At the end of the discussion, please briefly answer the three questions mentioned at the end of the introduction to demonstrate that the goals of this work have been achieved.
Response 3:
We have added a brief summary at the end of the discussion section that addresses the three questions posed in the introduction, demonstrating the achievement of our research goals.
Comment 4:
Please go through the manuscript for some grammar errors and improve the language.
Response 4:
We have thoroughly reviewed the manuscript for grammar errors and improved the language to enhance readability and clarity.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear,
The research addresses an important topic for the viticulture sector. The research addresses an important topic, the phytosanitary management of fungi, in the crop, thus understanding the culture of the producers, can increase data regarding the phytosanitary management of the crop. The introduction is well contextualized, but I suggest redoing the results topic, seeking to correlate the two metadata evaluated, qualitative and quantitative.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your feedback. We have carefully reviewed the manuscript and made adjustments to improve its quality.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments and Suggestions for Authors
The manuscript titled “Adoption and Impact of Fungus-Resistant Grape Varieties within German Viticulture: A Comprehensive Mixed-Methods Study with Producers” by Kiefer and Szolnoki (Ref: Submission ID Sustainability-2991861).
Relying on planting downy mildew-resistant grape varieties instead of using chemical fungicides that contain copper is very important and necessary and will have a strong impact on the wine industry. The manuscript is scientifically sound and is the experimental design appropriate to test the hypothesis. However, I have some minor comments.
Comments:
In line 20, the scientific name of grape downy mildew is Plasmopara viticola, not perenospora, please change it.
In line 21, depends not depend.
In line 102, change “Prior to” to Before.
In line 153, add “a” before yield.
I have no other comments. I recommend a minor revision.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your helpful suggestions. We have implemented the following changes:
Comment 1:
In line 20, the scientific name of grape downy mildew is Plasmopara viticola, not perenospora. Please change it.
Response 1:
We have corrected "perenospora" to "Plasmopara viticola" in line 20.
Comment 2:
In line 21, it should be "depends" instead of "depend".
Response 2:
We have changed "depend" to "depends" in line 21.
Comment 3:
In line 102, change “Prior to” to "Before".
Response 3:
We have replaced "Prior to" with "Before" in line 102.
Comment 4:
In line 153, please add “a” before "yield".
Response 4:
We have adjusted the wording in line 153.
Comment 5:
Please provide F-values and degrees of freedom.
Response 5:
We have included F-values and degrees of freedom in the respective sections.
