Factors Driving Unexpected Drought-Induced Nothofagus dombeyi Mortality in a Valdivian Temperate Rainforest, Argentina

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

There is no denying that sustainable forest management is important amid climate change, especially during the long-term or seasonal drought. However, in this paper, to improve the quality of manuscript, there are some comments as follows:

L2 I suggest providing the species name and the period during the drought in your title.

L10 If you investigated single species Nothofagus dombeyi, why don't you add the species name in your title?

Also, you mentioned the species name here first, so it should be Nothofagus dombeyi not N. dombeyi by following the basic rule.

L14 full name (even if we know it)

L15 Unlike our hypothesis---?

L16 Your findings are too vague here. Can you please summarize here with more details?

L20 Please rewrite your significant findings and highlight that with some numeric values.

L29 Full name first

L30 Do not bold in the manuscript.

Also what was difference between former IPCC report and recent IPCC 2023 report? It would be great to highlight that.

L38 ditto

L40 Did your three references mention what % of mortality rate by region over time?

L52 (i.e., more pervasive drought legacies)

L65 I think it would be great to mention it in your abstract.

L84 ditto

L111 Start from new paragraph.

L134 Did you measure it yourself with HOBO or weather station? If not, provide relevant reference regarding this.

L145 mm year –1

L146 Your research talks about drought caused by climate change in 2014 but reference is in 1972?

L179 What does that mean? Please check if it is right format in research paper.

L181 so what is implication regarding your results? or how does it affect? did you just not use the data in the early 1960s or used another data? Please clarify it.

L190 60 trees sample in 3.6 km2? normally is it enough samples for data analysis?

L190 what is ca.?

L305 Please add some highlight sentence in your sub-title of researchs (e.g., dead trees showed the lowest growth rates during drier ones)

L 355 Indicators or dependent variables?

L458 Can be added your abstract or conclusion part.

L461 How heat and drought stress more affected taller and dominant species according to your references?

L592 Your conclusion should mention whether or not your hypothesis was consonant with your results or somewhat different firstly.

L595 Basically this drought happened almost ten years ago, is there any reason this manuscript is published now and what is implication compared with current climate change, other drought events or potential events?

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Editor,

 

This study investigates the factors influencing N. dombeyi mortality following the 2014-2015 drought in Argentina's Valdivian rainforest using dendroecology.

 

The research topic is highly relevant to Forests' readers, addressing challenges related to tree responses to drought amidst climate change and increasing concerns for forest ecosystem health. The study provides detailed evidence and in-depth analysis of complex interactions among tree growth patterns, climate sensitivity, and environmental effects, including competition and species mixing. This work significantly contributes new insights into how tree species respond to extreme climatic events.

 

While the manuscript is well-written, the methods demonstrate scientific rigor, and the results are well-presented and explained, the text could benefit from condensation. Some sections appear lengthy and could be streamlined to enhance readability and maintain reader engagement. Therefore, I recommend minor revisions to focus on key findings and their implications. This approach will improve clarity and ensure the manuscript effectively communicates its scientific contributions.

 

Below are specific areas where concise revisions could be made:

 

Title: You might consider including the name of the tree species in the title to significantly improve the visibility and identifiability of the manuscript within the scientific community.

 

Introduction: Despite it is well written, I found this introduction is too long and could be shortened to improve clarity and readability. The description of the effects of drought and tree mortality could be condensed, keeping only the essential information. Additionally, it would be useful to mention that this study can provide important insights for planning effective forest management strategies aimed at mitigating episodes of mortality related to drought and climate change. This would give the study greater practical relevance and directly link it to conservation efforts and sustainable forest management. 

Line 69-75: For a deeper understanding of ecological dynamics during drought periods, it could be advantageous to include studies that examine the effects of tree associations. These studies investigate how reciprocal interactions among trees of different species within a stand can enhance ecosystem resilience to water stress. For instance, research has shown that tree associations can promote resource sharing and reduce interspecies competition, thereby facilitating a better response of trees to drought (https://doi.org/10.3390/f12091251;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.01.023 ;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00419) These studies would not only enrich our theoretical understanding but also provide concrete examples of how community dynamics influence tree performance under environmental stress.

Line 179-183: Could you provide the distance between the weather station and the study site?

 

Discussion: The text is extremely long-winded, especially section 4.2. the manuscript could improve readability by condensing some concepts. Furthermore, could be important to underscore how the findings of this research can enhance species management, particularly in terms of mitigating mortality risks. Emphasizing this aspect could offer vital insights for developing more effective conservation strategies and forest management practices tailored to the studied species.

 

Line 468-470: This statement could be supported by adequate reference.

 

Conclusion: The actual conclusion appears very similar to an abstract. I therefore propose to summarize the main results of the research using bullet points. Furthermore, it would be appropriate to include a section dedicated to future study and research prospects, to outline possible developments and insights

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study elucidates the complex impacts of drought on trees. The authors have conducted interesting work, but some points still need attention, including:

 

1. Despite the introduction providing a general overview of the issue, it lacks a deeper theoretical framework to explain the mechanisms through which competition and facilitation influence responses to drought.

2. There is no scale in Figure 1b; please add one. It would be helpful to establish connections between Figures 1a and 1b.

3. There are two instances of "2.4" in the manuscript; please verify.

4. Please consider whether the direction of tree core sampling might impact the results. This is not addressed in the article.

5. Please verify the order of references.

6. Please add annotations for abbreviations in figures and tables. Ensure consistency in formatting and line thickness in Tables 3 and 4.

7. The sampling scope is limited, with only 60 trees sampled. Can this support the conclusions drawn?

8. The discussion of results should be more detailed, focusing on comparisons with previous studies and explanations of the mechanisms in this study.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

9. Certain parts of the text contain grammar errors and awkward phrasing, making the material difficult to understand.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Unfortunately, it is hard to check every revision in your manuscript. Please use track changes mode with the line number and resubmit it. Thank you. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf