Native Pig Breeds as a Source of Biodiversity—Breeding and Economic Aspects
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper reviews characterizations of swine breeds that are available in the literature. As such it is a valuable contribution.
However, the Introduction alludes to the size, performance and diversity of populations and this information is not followed up on in any detailed quantitative way in the remainder of the article and it should be. Without this basic population genetics information the paper falls short of its goals. The authors themselves allude to the value of this information (line 911).
The article is written in a clear and easily understood manner.
Author Response
Responses to the comments of Reviewer 1
Dear Reviewer,
We would like to thank the Reviewer for all valuable notes and comments. We have revised the manuscript according to recommendation. We are convinced that Reviewer’s suggestions made the article much more valuable.
Our reviewer is right. The authors apologize for this mistake. The manuscript has been corrected in the “Track changes” function.
Best regards,
authors
Reviewer 2 Report
Major comments
Abstract
- You should clearly refer to the aim of this review article
Introduction
- The length of the ‘’introduction’’ is too small in comparison to the length of this article
Materials and Methods
- You should improve the description of your ‘’materials and methods’’
- Did you applied any statistical analysis??
- You did not report in separate section the ‘’results’’
Minor comments
- L37: .. changes in European agriculture
- L38: …last decades have impeded the sustenance of diversity
- L66: .. important for the maintenance
- L92: .. number of publications
- L99: .. with a production of 21-22 million
- L101: .. EU is the second-largest
- L106: .. with the good quality and taste
- L157: .. breeds with critical population size
- L195: They, therefore, constitute
- L339: .. with well-developed shoulders
- L408: .. emerged because of planned
- L439: .. after achieving of carcass weight
- L574: .. plants has recorded
- L914: .. used for the manufacture of
- L918: .. contribute to the improvement
- L922: .. Given climate change
Author Response
Responses to the comments of Reviewer 2
Dear Reviewer,
We would like to thank the Reviewer for all valuable notes and comments. We have revised the manuscript according to recommendation. We are convinced that Reviewer’s suggestions made the article much more valuable.
Abstract
- You should clearly refer to the aim of this review article
Response:
Our reviewer is right. The authors apologize for this mistake. The manuscript has been corrected in the “Track changes” function.
Introduction
- The length of the ‘’introduction’’ is too small in comparison to the length of this article.
Response:
The introduction is short, as we intended to present only the most important information related to the subject of the review.
Materials and Methods
- You should improve the description of your ‘’materials and methods’’
- Did you applied any statistical analysis??
- You did not report in separate section the ‘’results’’
Response:
Thank you for your comment. We edited accordingly.
No statistical analysis was performed because the aim of the study was to collect available information on individual local breeds. For this reason, there is no ‘Results’ section.
Minor comments
- L37: .. changes in European agriculture
- L38: …last decades have impeded the sustenance of diversity
- L66: .. important for the maintenance
- L92: .. number of publications
- L99: .. with a production of 21-22 million
- L101: .. EU is the second-largest
- L106: .. with the good quality and taste
- L157: .. breeds with critical population size
- L195: They, therefore, constitute
- L339: .. with well-developed shoulders
- L408: .. emerged because of planned
- L439: .. after achieving of carcass weight
- L574: .. plants has recorded
- L914: .. used for the manufacture of
- L918: .. contribute to the improvement
- L922: .. Given climate change
Response:
Thank you for your comment. We edited accordingly.
The authors appreciates your help in improving the quality of the manuscript.
Best regards,
authors
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have no further concerns with the revised manuscript. While I am recommending its publication, I leave the final decision to the editor.
Reviewer 2 Report
No extra comments.
I accept the revised manuscript