Global Sensitivity Analysis of the LPJ Model for Larix olgensis Henry Forests NPP in Jilin Province, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Good work on a highly relevant topic. The paper can be considered to be of general and international interest. The authors clearly state the aim of the paper and present data, approach, and methods in great detail and with relevant literature cited. Results are presented in great detail. Conclusions provide the reader with a short and general
synthesis of the results. It seems of great interest to analyze the sensitivity of the parameters in order to identify and calibrate the most critical parameters to improve the predictions, however, the fluctuating conclusions depending on the method applied as well as the uncertainties raised the need for further study. Can the two proposed methods really be compared? Please clarify it in the manuscript. Taking into account the constraints posed by uncertainties, would you really say that your conclusions bring a substantial improvement to the model? Please clarify it in the text.

In any case, I think the work is correct and my corrections are minor, however it needs a review of the format to standardize various concepts.

 

Please review the nomenclature of the species and put them in italics, as well as add their author the first time they are cited. For example: L. 12, 74, 90:93, 95 ….

Please review the way of citing the bibliography in the text, it is not correct and they mix several styles. For example: 146 (... is modified based on Waring et al. [31]; referring to Magnani et al. [32]….., 147,…… 181, 185, 222, 424, 478, 479, 489, 498, 504, 550, 573, 607 among others.

Table 1: Which parameters refer to the Individual Assets module (I)?

Eq 4 and 5: What is d meaning? Is the unit effet?

L.91: change poplar by Populus spp.

L.277: Interval?

Author Response

Thank you very much for the review of experts and editors！The suggestions and guidance put forward are of great help to me. These issues have been revised according to the requirements. Please see the attachment!

Thank you again and best wishes!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This study based on the EFAST and Morris methods to analyzes and compares the parameter sensitivity of the annual mean NPP of Larix olgensis forests in Jilin Province simulated by the LPJ model in 2009-2014 and 2000-2019. The topic of this study interesting, and providing technical support for improving the calibration efficiency of the parameters in LPJ model.

(1) In abstract, when you first use an abbreviation, please use the full name. e.g., EFAST, NPP, and LPJ.

(2) Please modify the article citation format. e.g., L37: [1,2,3,4].

(3) Please supplement the current situation and existing research of Larix olgensis forests NPP in Jilin Province in the introduction.

(4) There are abundant style and grammar issues, sometimes rendering the text unintelligible. e.g., L97-100, L110-115: The sentence is too long, please revise.

(5) L141: Please add the source of the vegetation map.

(6) In discussion, some cited author information is missing. Please check the citation format of the full text, there are different citation styles.

Author Response

Thank you very much for the review of experts and editors！The suggestions and guidance put forward are of great help to me. These issues have been revised according to the requirements. Please see the attachment!

Thank you again and best wishes!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx