Principles and Prospects of Prunus Cultivation in Greenhouse

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Nice review! My suggestion is that the title should refer to peach and apricot not to Prunus in general because there are not too many information in this review on sweet and sour cherries, European and Japanese plums and almonds although there are common issues of Prunus species. Therefore, in my opinion, a more focused title can be taken into account...

Author Response

Dear Mr. Zsolt Szekely-Varga, Assistant Editor of Agronomy,

please find enclosed the revised version (agronomy-1119806 R1) entitled “Principles and prospects of peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] and apricot (P. armeniaca L.) cultivation in greenhouse” of the former manuscript agronomy-1119806 entitled “Principles and prospects of Prunus cultivation in greenhouse” which we would like to publish in your journal.

According with the suggestions of the Reviewer 1 we have revised the manuscript incorporating the proposed revisions indicating these revisions with the control of changes of the WORD document.

Regarding reviewer's 1 comments (R1):

 R1: English language and style are fine/minor spell check required.

Authors: English grammar and expression has been also revised. In addition, all the revisions have been incorporated indicating these revisions with the “Track Changes” of the WORD document.

R1: Nice review! My suggestion is that the title should refer to peach and apricot not to Prunus in general because there are not too many information in this review on sweet and sour cherries, European and Japanese plums and almonds although there are common issues of Prunus species. Therefore, in my opinion, a more focused title can be taken into account.

Authors: We agree and thank the Reviewer for their valuable comments about the revision of this work. According to the suggestion of the reviewer title of the Manuscript has been changed by other more accurate “Principles and prospects of peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] and apricot (P. armeniaca L.) cultivation in greenhouse”.

We deeply appreciate the efforts of the reviewer in the improvement of the manuscript for a future publication.

Yours faithfully,

Dr. Pedro Martínez-Gómez

CEBAS-CSIC, Murcia (Spain)

Reviewer 2 Report

This review loosely describes a variety of protected cultivation techniques, largely in Europe, used to cultivate pome fruit. The control of pests, and unique market opportunities are important aspects of these cultivation systems.  Some of the unique physiological nuances of orchard culture in a protected environment is the strength of this paper.

However, it makes no sense that these techniques have been known for 40 years, all of the outcomes are positive, and there is little adaptation.  A more balanced introduction is needed.  The core of the paper (109-276) should be more focused on published experiments and commercial examples of closed cover cultivation for Prunus.  If these honestly do not exist, a discussion as to why we have not done this work is needed.   I will guess that the papers and commercial information from Japan, Korea and China were too lightly reviewed.

Important factors like labor and equipment are not discussed. 

The temperature anomalies, both chill hours and excessive heat, can be handled by retractable films or temporary structures.  This is not mentioned.

The paper does not strictly adhere to any type of boundaries on the subjects reviewed.

It is an interesting story, but lacks the rigor of a critical review.

Comments by line number are as follows:

45                        I visited commercial cherry high tunnels in Shizuoka and Nigata, Japan in 1992

52-8                     Fruit health, low caliber, lack of carbon dioxide is not clearly understood

87-93                   your discussion needs to be balanced with negative factors

109                      Eurocentric- Chinese, Korean, Japanese all had advanced systems early on

109—276            too general and loosely selected descriptions of general pomology

Author Response

Dear Mr. Zsolt Szekely-Varga, Assistant Editor of Agronomy,

please find enclosed the revised version (agronomy-1119806 R1) entitled “Principles and prospects of peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] and apricot (P. armeniaca L.) cultivation in greenhouse” of the former manuscript agronomy-1119806 entitled “Principles and prospects of Prunus cultivation in greenhouse” which we would like to publish in your journal.

According with the suggestions of the Reviewer 2 we have revised the manuscript incorporating the proposed revisions indicating these revisions with the control of changes of the WORD document.

Regarding reviewer's 2 comments (R2):

 R2: English language and style are fine/minor spell check required.

Authors: English grammar and expression has been revised. In addition, all the revisions have been incorporated indicating these revisions with the “Track Changes” of the WORD document.

R2: This review loosely describes a variety of protected cultivation techniques, largely in Europe, used to cultivate pome fruit. The control of pests, and unique market opportunities are important aspects of these cultivation systems. Some of the unique physiological nuances of orchard culture in a protected environment is the strength of this paper.

Authors: We agree and thank the Reviewer for their valuable comments about the interest of this review. All the key references describing this protected cultivation in apricot and peach together with related Prunus species have been incorporated also discussing unique physiological nuances of orchard culture in these protected environments

R2: However, it makes no sense that these techniques have been known for 40 years, all of the outcomes are positive, and there is little adaptation. A more balanced introduction is needed.  The core of the paper (109-276) should be more focused on published experiments and commercial examples of closed cover cultivation for Prunus. If these honestly do not exist, a discussion as to why we have not done this work is needed. I will guess that the papers and commercial information from Japan, Korea and China were too lightly reviewed.

Authors: We agree and thank the Reviewer for their valuable comments about the revision of this work. Introduction has been revised. In addition to the scientific papers, commercial information from Spain, Italy, Japan and China has been incorporated from different web pages.

 R2: Important factors like labour and equipment are not discussed.

Authors: We agree and thank the Reviewer for their valuable comments. This question has been clarified in sections 2.4. Summer pruning and stem girdling. Specific labour and equipment requirements are necessary to perform these tasks in controlled and reduced conditions.

R2: The temperature anomalies, both chill hours and excessive heat, can be handled by retractable films or temporary structures.  This is not mentioned.

Authors: We agree and thank the Reviewer for their valuable comments. This question has been clarified in sections 2.5. Temperature and humidity control, 4.2. How to break bud dormancy in greenhouse conditions? and 4.3. High temperature in greenhouse in warm conditions. The use of temporary structures which can be opened during winter or summer should an alternative, although this solution can increase production costs also increasing the risk of pest and disease infections.

R2: The paper does not strictly adhere to any type of boundaries on the subjects reviewed. It is an interesting story, but lacks the rigor of a critical review.

Authors: Manuscript has been strongly revised adding new references and new commercial information from Spain, Italy, Japan and China from different web pages. In addition, some concepts and expressions have been clarified together with a deeper discussion of the critical aspects.

R2: Comments by line number are as follows: 45 I visited commercial cherry high tunnels in Shizuoka and Nigata, Japan in 1992.

Authors: This sentence has been revised according to the suggestion of the reviewer “Up until more or less four decades ago, this has been the production strategy followed by the majority of fruit farms, despite appreciable differences in the degree of applied knowledge among the farms”.

R2: 52-58 Fruit health, low caliber, lack of carbon dioxide is not clearly understood

Authors: This sentence has been revised according to the suggestions of the reviewer “Among the most significant factors limiting fruit tree production, we can include a lack of sunlight, temperature inconsistency, a surplus or loss of moisture, weed growth, wind speed, reduced carbon dioxide levels in some areas, low caliber fruits in cold areas, pest and disease infection in open air conditions, the effect of strange odors and flavors, and late maturity. These restrictions, mainly in cold areas, are related to abiotic stress, due to changing climatic conditions, and biotic stress, and they can be minimized by protected fruit tree cultivation”.

R2: 87-93 your discussion needs to be balanced with negative factors

Authors: We agree and thank the Reviewer for the valuable comment. In the introduction section in lines 87-93 negative factors have been also included.

R2: 109  Eurocentric- Chinese, Korean, Japanese all had advanced systems early on.

Authors:. This sentence has been revised according to the suggestions of the reviewer “There is a highly diverse array of practices currently in use, ranging from those used by the Ancient Chinese, Japanese, Greeks and Romans to distinctly modern practices requiring satellites in orbit [11].  ”.

R2: 109—276 too general and loosely selected descriptions of general pomology

Authors: According to the suggestions of the reviewer Section 2. Main factors involved in the cultivation of fruit trees in the greenhouse has been completed and clarified.

 We deeply appreciate the efforts of the reviewer in the improvement of the manuscript for a future publication.

Yours faithfully,

Dr. Pedro Martínez-Gómez

CEBAS-CSIC, Murcia (Spain)