Influence of Hydrological and Climatic Changes on Tree Growth in Narew National Park, NE Poland, over the Past 50 Years

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Topic of the paper is very good. Structure and presentation was also well but methodology section need improvement before acceptance. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

I added replies to comments in a pdf file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study investigated the impact of climate change and hydrological conditions over the past 50 years on the growth of Scots pine and black alder located in northeastern Poland. The authors focused on the differences in responses to climate and hydrological changes across different tree generations (young, middle-aged, and old), by analyzing tree-ring width indices, the study found that Scots pine is more sensitive to changes in air temperature and annual precipitation, whereas black alder responds more strongly to fluctuations in water levels. Additionally, younger generations of both Scots pine and black alder showed stronger responses to changes in climate and hydrological conditions compared to older generations. Overall, the finding is interesting and the analysis is in-depth, providing valuable scientific insights into how trees adapt to changed conditions. Please find my specific suggestions below:

1. Although this study focuses on ‘hydrological and climatic changes’, there have already several studies investigated the sensitivity of productivity to variations in precipitation, water level or soil water content with the similar approach. To this point, the authors need highlight the novelty or new findings of this study.

2. The study suggests that with the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration, the growth rate of trees accelerates, and their drought resistance improves. However, this may also lead to a decrease in wood density and a reduced sensitivity of trees to climate change, particularly in older trees. It might be worth considering the inclusion of CO2 concentration data, which is readily available, to conduct a correlation analysis. This could provide stronger support for the conclusion.

3. The impact of hydrological and climatic changes on tree growth is a recurring theme throughout, which necessitates the consideration of temporal scale variations. As this study has found, young and mature trees respond differently. Based on this, I suggest conducting a trend analysis of the growth data for older trees as they age. Such results would provide stronger support for the conclusions. Additionally, it may be worthwhile to extend the beyond of data covering the period of 1971-2020, using the most comprehensive and updated datasets available. Given that the oldest pine and alder trees are 88 and 86 years old, extending the temporal scope of the analysis could enhance the robustness of findings.

4. Another point to consider is that the analysis was conducted at seasonally scale. How do you plan to exclude the effects caused by differences in across different months? For example, drought conditions identified in the early growing season might not immediately impact vegetation growth, with the effects only manifesting in the late growing season—this is known as a lag effect, which could potentially persist for several years.

5. To make the results more convincing, besides precipitation and water level, I suggest calculating biomass sensitivity using soil moisture data.

6. All results were presented in tables, which may not be sufficiently intuitive. I recommend converting Table 2 into a timeseries graph to better capture temporal trends. Additionally, consider transforming Tables 4 and 5 into bar charts to present the results more effectively.

7. Some key sections of the paper lack citations, such as the data sources mentioned in lines 134-138 and the data processing methods in lines 147-152.

8. Similarly, the discussion section when references certain result without citing relevant figures or tables, as seen in lines 290-292. Although these are included in the paper, referencing them in the discussion will make it easier for readers to review and improve readability.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

totally good, beside some sentences are convoluted and may benefit from simplification or rephrasing to improve coherence

Author Response

I added replies to comments in a Word file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Title: The title is very specific, which is actually good that it leave no misinterpretation. However, to reach a larger audience, perhaps a more generic title can be introduced, followed by introducing the subtitle that contains the climatic type of the region or the country. Right now, most people would not know where Narew National Park is, and what type of climate it is in. Is it in a tropical region? Arid? Tundra? This kind of information should be available on the title so that potential readers can find this paper.

 

Abstract: Perhaps some specific information from the body of the abstract can be cut, to leave some room at the top for background of the study. Why do we need to conduct this study? What is the pressing issue the world have that can be addressed by this study? One or two short sentences here would be enough to set the tone of the paper.

 

Materials and method: Although the name of the country is shown in the Figure, it is also important to mention it in text. Not all audience know that Narew National Park is in Poland. Also introduce briefly about the geographical condition of the area.

Results: Is there a way to present the main results in several colored figures? I imagine a heatmap would be excellent to highlight the most dramatic changes. Also, I think the figures should be in the body of the manuscript, whereas the table can be in the appendix if readers want to see more details.

Conclusion: it is missing limitation and future studies.

 

 

Author Response

I added replies to comments in a Word file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx