Review of the Current Status and Development Trend of Global Forest Carbon Storage Research Based on Bibliometrics
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper evaluated the current status and developments of research related to forest carbon storage using bibiometrics. The paper mostly used CiteSPace to perform the analyses.
The paper evaluates a relevant topic that is worth pursuing further. It might have been interesting to include a comparison of research related to natural forests vs plantation forests and how research between the two compares. However, this may be considered for future research.
Strengths of the paper:
The paper is well written and easy to follow. The use of CiteSpace is commendable. The paper illustrates a clear progress in the research field. The paper included various references and provide clear insights regarding recent developments. The research design is appropriate. The conclusions are consistent with the evidence provided. The ethics and data availability statements are appropriate.
Weaknesses of the paper:
The introduction could be improved by explicitly adding a problem statement, research objectives and research questions. The methodology section is very brief. It doesn't critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology used and subsequently define the limitations of the study. The paper didn't consider that research publications in general have grown substantially in recent times and thus, if a specific field has grown it might just indicate a general trend and nothing specific to the field of interest. The figures should be improved. It is difficult to read them.
Please see detailed comments in the attachment.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment for detailed reply.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPlease see attached.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment for our detailed reply.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
The review type article entitled "Review of the current status and development trend of global 2 forest carbon storage research based on bibliometrics" fully complies with the "instructions for authors" defined by the Forsests journal.
In summary, I found that the paper has no significant shortcomings. A well-structured study contains the mandatory content elements.
My main findings can be summarized in the followings:
1. The abstract gives an adequate picture of the background of the preparation of the study, the applied research methods and the results. It also includes the possible application fields of the research results.
2. In the Section 1 Introduction , the scientific problem and objectives were described, which gives coherent picture about the current state of science in the field.
3. The applied methodology (bibliometric analysis and subsequent visualisation) and the discription of the examined material were clearly stated in Section 2 Materials and Methods.
4. The scientific results have been determined in an order and with content corresponding to the research objectives, and the associated illustrations provide an excellent overview of them.
5. In the discussion Section 4., the comparison of the results with existing publications was also presented in an appropriate manner. Future research trends are also given in a proper way.
In addition to highlighting the paper' strengths, I suggest some minor clarifications to the authors:
1. In Section 2, I propose to present the procedural steps of the research carried out in this study in a overview figure.
2. For Section 3. Results and 4. Discussion, I recommend giving a brief summary of the work performed in the related subsections just immediately after the titles (lines 90 and 513).
Based on the above, after the revision of the article, I suggest the publication of reviewed article.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Thank you for your comments. Please see the attchment for our reply.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
