Linking Vegetation, Soil Carbon Stocks, and Earthworms in Upland Coniferous–Broadleaf Forests
, Anna P. Geraskina, Natalia V. Lukina, Vadim E. Smirnov, Elena V. Tikhonova, Nikolay E. Shevchenko, Aleksey V. Gornov, Elena V. Ruchinskaya and Daria N. TebenkovaRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
An interesting work that studies several environmental factors, and their role in C storage in forest systems.
The study areas are well characterized, and the methodologies used are clearly explained. Well explored results and adequate discussion.
Please note the following repairs:
Abstract
You should add a short paragraph on the experimental design/methodologies
Introduction
Good
Material and Methods
Can you add a map of the geographic location of the study area?
It should be mentioned if they are conservation forests, logging ,...
Line 210 - Have you determined the carbon stored in the L layer? You should refer on the text.
Results
An error occurred when trying to consult Tables S1, S2, S3, S4, S5 (www.mdpi.com/xxx/s1), so I could not confirm the information referred to in the text
The explanation of the abbreviations used in Tables 1 and 2 should appear in both tables. The reading of each Table should be independent
Figure 1 - Write out the meaning of the acronym NMDS
The quality of figures should be improved
In material and methods refer to harvesting soil at depth 0-50 cm. Table 2 shows two soil layers (0-30 and 30-50 cm). It is necessary to create consistency!
Why didn't you determine the carbon stored in the L layer?
Discussion
Good
Conclusion
Good
Note: All Latin names must be in italics! Please, review the text
Author Response
- You should add a short paragraph on the experimental design/methodologies
Response 1: A short paragraph was added. See Intro line 15.
- Material and Methods. Can you add a map of the geographic location of the study area?
Response 2: A map of the geographic location of the study area was added (See Figure 1)
- It should be mentioned if they are conservation forests, logging,...
Response 3: The information about the history of forests was added. See Line 118, 131, 151.
- Line 210 - Have you determined the carbon stored in the L layer? You should refer on the text.
Response 4: We haven’t determined the carbon stored in the L layer. We use L-layer only for characteristic litter quality.
- An error occurred when trying to consult Tables S1, S2, S3, S4, S5 (www.mdpi.com/xxx/s1), so I could not confirm the information referred to in the text
Response 5: It should be a technical mistake. We will try to renew this information when we will upload the revising manuscript.
- The explanation of the abbreviations used in Tables 1 and 2 should appear in both tables. The reading of each Table should be independent. Figure 1 - Write out the meaning of the acronym NMDS
Response 6: We have added explanation of the abbreviations both tables and graphs.
- The quality of figures should be improved
Response 7: We have improved quality of figures.
- In material and methods refer to harvesting soil at depth 0-50 cm. Table 2 shows two soil layers (0-30 and 30-50 cm). It is necessary to create consistency!
Response 8: We have renewed this information in material and methods.
- Why didn't you determine the carbon stored in the L layer?
Response 9: We analyzed only FH-layer because it was more constant. We haven’t determined the carbon stored in the L layer due We used it only for characteristic litter quality, which is the one of the main predictor of soil carbon stock in mineral and organic layer.
- Note:All Latin names must be in italics! Please, review the text
Response 10: Revised.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors provided an interesting manuscript. Overall, the link of soil carbon stocks and soil biota is well known. The authors provide an interesting case study corroborating existing knowledge.
The ms is technically in a very good state. Improvements are possible:
- the authors are referencing work that is of little relevance for their own research
- the authors are taking information from other papers by its face value without critical view
- there are some technical shortcomings
Intro line 30: Easier to read might be: Soils contain 40% or more of the site carbon stock.
Yet, this statement can be misleading. In many cases soils contain more than 50% of the total carbon stock. -- A quick analysis for the investigated data would be helpfu. It makes a diference whether the majority of C sits in the biomass or the soil.
l. 38 'composition of tree plants' could be 'tree species composition'
Methods: a map of the investigated sites could be helpful.
l 109 Korotkov ... in ()?
l 113 Dystric Cambisols / not reversed!, see also l 132
l 114 ... more pronounced .... / a comparison is missing: more pronounced than what?
l 169: which equation is meant?
l. 185 is the equation correct?
l. 259: each table should be legible by itself. Abbreviations should be repeated if necesssary.
l. 279 the entire para is difficult to read
l. 349 (and elsewhere) litter quality is suposingly 'chemical litter quality'
Figure 2 the y axis has no units and no label
Figure 3: no y axis description and legend too small --
general comment on graphs: increase font size
Discussion
l 555 the leading role of climate factors should be checked with site data.
l 573 the relevance of soil texture in the investigated cases should be shown.
Author Response
- the authors are referencing work that is of little relevance for their own research
Response 1: We reference different work because our work is complex and interdisciplinary.
- the authors are taking information from other papers by its face value without critical view
Response 2: We added some comments about factors that influence Soil carbon stocks.
- Intro line 30: Easier to read might be: Soils contain 40% or more of the site carbon stock. 38 'composition of tree plants' could be 'tree species composition'
Response 3: Revised.
- Methods: a map of the investigated sites could be helpful.
Response 4: A map of the geographic location of the study area was added (See Figure 1)
- l 109 Korotkov ... in ()?
Response 5: Revised
- l 113 Dystric Cambisols / not reversed!, see also l 132
Response 6: Revised
- l 114 ... more pronounced .... / a comparison is missing: more pronounced than what?
Response 7: Revised
- l 169: which equation is meant?
Response 8: The equation of stem wood stock was added.
- 185 is the equation correct?
Response 9: The equation is correct. This index usually is used for species diversity, but we use it for functional diversity.
- 259: each table should be legible by itself. Abbreviations should be repeated if necesssary.
Response 10: We have added an explanation of the abbreviations both tables and graphs. We have improved the quality of the figures.
- 279 the entire para is difficult to read
Response 11: Revised
- 349 (and elsewhere) litter quality is suposingly 'chemical litter quality'
Response 12:Yes.
- Figure 2 the y axis has no units and no label. Figure 3: no y axis description and legend too small general comment on graphs: increase font size
Response 13: Revised
- l 555 the leading role of climate factors should be checked with site data.
Response 14: Revised.
- l 573 the relevance of soil texture in the investigated cases should be shown.
Response 15: We characterize soil texture in part 3.1 (line 263). In discussion, It was shown that other factors, first of all, biotic ones, are of great importance in the soil C stock variation than texture.
