Dynamics Variation of Soil Labile Organic Carbon Fractions in Different Wetland Types of Dongting Lake under Seasonal Water Level Fluctuation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Review for “sustainability-1446159” Dynamics variation of soil labile organic carbon fractions in different wetland types of Dongting Lake under seasonal water level fluctuation.
This manuscript investigates the effects of water fluctuation of labile soil organic carbon and its variation in wetlands. The degradability of SOC defines carbon mitigation, and therefore knowledge about the current controlling factor in wetlands is important for reducing GHGs emissions. The manuscript was well rewritten and the study well designed. Only a few minor corrections are required before publication.
L14-15: please rewrite this sentence. It seems not complete.
L19: explain DOC.
L21: MBC and EOC??? Please thoroughly check the manuscript and define the abbreviations when used for the first time.
L24: SOC?
L19-26: it worth including some numerical results in this section.
Keywords: “Dongting Lake wetlands; soil labile organic carbon” already presented in the title. It is better to use different keywords to increase the article's visibility.
L53-58: also, there are several mineral factors that control SOC changes and their dynamic. It is recommended considering the following paper for the effect of mineral factors in controlling SOC.
Carbon stock and mineral factors controlling soil organic carbon in a climatic gradient, Golestan province. March 2012, Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 12(4):637-654.
L59: it seems the citation is inconsistent with the journal format.
Figure 1. low quality, and the text inside the figure is not readable.
Move table 1 to the first section of the Results. Still, soil measurement, statistical analysis and the other parts did not explain. Thus it is a part of the results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The study deals with changes of labile organic carbon fractions in different wetland types due to seasonal water level fluctuations. Because the subject of the manuscript is the study of properties that are very variable depending on climatic conditions and space, I have the following comments on the manuscript:
- The whole study is based on sampling at only one site, namely Dongting lake, and within it three sampling points. There is no comparison with another site in the study.
- The study deals with the evaluation of seasonal changes of selected soil properties due to water level fluctuations. However, all "seasonal changes" are only within one year (sampling in May, August, and December). Comparison of abstractions over several years is lacking, while the MBC concentration is strongly dependent on climatic conditions and changes significantly during the year even without fluctuations in the water level.
- The design of the experiment is insufficient: L130-135 - „three sampling quadrats (5 m × 5 m) were arbitrarily established in each wetland and the distance between nearly quadrat was more than 20 m. In each sampling quadrat, 5 sampling points were randomly selected for the collection of surface soil layer (0-20 cm) using metal soil sampler (length 50 cm, diameter 4.0 cm). The soil samples from each quadrat were thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample.” With this experimental design, only three soil samples from each wetland in a single season are available for analysis. This number of samples is insufficient to determine the relationships between highly variable soil characteristics.
- Statistical analysis: the study deals with changes in the labile carbon content depending on seasonal changes in water level, but all statistical analyzes are always performed only within one season. There is a lack of statistical comparison and evaluation between seasons.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper is addressing variation in soil labile carbon pool fractions which is an interesting environmental issue at present scenario. The topic is of high relevance for climate change related issues and the approach of considering the soil enzymatic is also well. It is clear, concise and comprehensive. However, before accepting this manuscript for publication, I request the authors for minor revision to address the following comments/concerns during revision.
- The abstract need minor modifications with prominent keywords.
- English usage must be improved for better clarity.
- The introduction needs some revision and adds some of the latest citations.
- It would be interesting to have clarified the conclusion part.
- Why not include dehydrogenase activity in this study?
- Please check the references and reference style of the journal.
- What are the National and International policy recommendations?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Abstract: Lines 14 and 15. Rewrite. It's not understood.
Explain all abbreviations in the abstract
Keywords: some keywords are already present in the title. Change them for others.
Line 94-96: That can be considered objectives?
Line 153: total kalium is widespread in the scientific world?
Line 172: put in superscript -1
Lines 187-189 and lines 192-194: are not contradictory ideas?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I note that my comments on the manuscript "Dynamics variation of soil labile organic carbon fractions in different wetland types of Dongting Lake under seasonal water level fluctuation" were not accepted and I do not consider the attached answers of the authors in the cover letter to be sufficient. I do not consider it a relevant argument that it was not possible to take and analyze more samples or to take from more places due to limited funding and the interruption of research due to the COVID 19 pandemic. Similarly, arguments about discussions with other authors who have taken measurements elsewhere. Such a discussion would be even if the authors conducted a study on several locations and cannot replace the replication of research on several locations.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
