Pyrenean Silver Fir Forests Retain Legacies of Past Disturbances and Climate Change in Their Growth, Structure and Composition

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments on forests-2282757-peer-review-v1

Title: Pyrenean Silver Fir Forests Retain Legacies of Past Disturbances and Climate Change in Their Growth, Structure, and Composition

Comments

Overall comment: The overall manuscript structure is fine, and the write-up is clear to the standard. The study and the idea flow have attracted my attention. The study has substantial contribution to the field and the authors raised an interesting topic and used a clear methodology. The quality and clarity of the writing are good.

Specific comments

Abstract

i. The abstract is well done and is to the standard.

ii. Put the keywords in alphabetic order.

1. Introduction

i. This section is well organized and reviewed adequate literature.

ii. I have one interest, in your title, you used the term composition, structure, and growth. In the manuscript, most of the report touches on growth and partly composition, but there are no adequate results and explanations on the relationships between climate change, human-made impacts, and forest structure. In addition, in the introduction section, these concepts are not well discussed.

2. Method section

i. The authors clearly mentioned the methods and the data types, however, the authors missed mentioning the total number of forested areas in which 11 sites were selected.

ii. The authors define the time from their study. In some parts, they mentioned the common period 1963-2016 and in some other parts, they used since 1900.

3. Results

I have no critical comments on this section, except including results that state the relation between structure, and historical climate change.

4. Conclusions

This section needs rewriting as per your study objectives and findings. Mainly the last two sentences are not conclusions.

In addition, see the pdf version for some additional and minor comments.

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

 

Dear reviewer #1,

 

Thank you very much for the interest in our work and for the positive and constructive comments and suggestions. We have revised the manuscript taking into consideration your comments and suggestions. First, we have revised the methods section to clarify the periods studied. Second, we have revised the results according to your comments. Finally, the conclusions have been rewritten.

 

In the following lines we answer to your comments and suggestions.

 

Sincerely,

 

Antonio Gazol

 

 

1. Put the keywords in alphabetic order.

• Done, thanks.

 

1. Introduction
2. I have one interest, in your title, you used the term composition, structure, and growth. In the manuscript, most of the report touches on growth and partly composition, but there are no adequate results and explanations on the relationships between climate change, human-made impacts, and forest structure. In addition, in the introduction section, these concepts are not well discussed.

• Thank you very much for this suggestion. According to it, we included a sentence in the introduction to briefly explain how past legacies can influence forest structure and drought-induced dieback (see lines 91-94; 107-109). In addition, we highlighted these aspects in the results (lines 317-319) and discussion sections (lines 336-337; 370-374).

 

2. Method section
3. The authors clearly mentioned the methods and the data types, however, the authors missed mentioning the total number of forested areas in which 11 sites were selected.

• Sorry for the misunderstanding. Each forested area is a site. That means that 11 forests were studied (see lines 118 & lines 123-133).

 

What is this? Pls use the full term before the abbreviation

• We corrected it. Sorry for the mistake (lines 124-125).

 

1900. The authors define the time from their study. In some parts, they mentioned the common period 1963-2016 and in some other parts, they used since 1900.

• You are right. We use different time periods depending on the analyses. We have clarified this aspect in the manuscript (see lines 212-222).

 

3. Results

I have no critical comments on this section, except including results that state the relation between structure, and historical climate change.

• We modified the results according to your comments (lines 317-319). We also revised the discussion as stated above (lines 336-337; 370-374).

 

4. Conclusions

This section needs rewriting as per your study objectives and findings. Mainly the last two sentences are not conclusions. Can this be considered as a conclusion based on your study findings?  These highlighted part need rewriting. Your conclusion should include how climate change in the past influence the forest? Which areas, from the selected 11 forest sites, which plant species...

• We modified the section following your recommendations (lines 414-426). However, we prefer to keep these sentences as we think that these are important future research avenues that need to be considered in the future.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Present version of the paper was well designed and detail. It has  also original  and new findings.

Detailed comments:

Title:  It monitors the paper. It is related to special issue entitled “Forest Succession: Natural and Anthropogenic Drivers of Ecological Change”

 

Abstract: It is sufficient and detailed. 

Key words: 6 sufficient keywords are given.

Introduction: It is given by related references. Aim/s of the paper are given clearly at end of this part.

Materials and Methods: It is sufficient and detailed.

Results: Results are original and related to paper’s findings. They are supported by Table and Figures.

Discussion: Results of the paper are discussed by published papers.

Conclusions: They are extracted results of the paper.

References, Table and Figures: All references, table and figures should be kept in the paper.

 

1. The paper address past disturbances and climate change are correlated by some growth and climatic data of 11 sampled areas to contribute management practices of the species.

2. The climate change is a global environmental problem. Past disturbances are studied by climatic data which is also an ecological characteristic. It is understood that from the cited references the dendrochronological studies were carried out in the species. However, the study past disturbances and climate change are correlated by some growth and climatic data detail. It is increasing getting originality of results of the paper based on collected data from field. So, the paper addressed a specific gap in the field.

 

3. Some dendrochronological studies were carried out in the species.  However, the paper has measured climatic data. Results of the study could be contributive for management and establishment of forests in the species.

4. Methodology is sufficient and detail.

5. The conclusions are extracted from results of the paper.

6. References are appropriate

7. All table and figures are related to the paper. They should be kept in the paper.

 

Best regards, 

Author Response

Thank you very much for the interest in our work and for your support.