Next Article in Journal
Modeling of Agricultural Nonpoint-Source Pollution Quantitative Assessment: A Case Study in the Mun River Basin, Thailand
Previous Article in Journal
Designing and Analysing a PV/Battery System via New Resilience Indicators
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Spatial Distribution of Soil Organic Carbon in Relation to Land Use, Based on the Weighted Overlay Technique in the High Andean Ecosystem of Puno—Peru

Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10316; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310316
by Daniel Canaza 1, Elmer Calizaya 2,*, Walter Chambi 1, Fredy Calizaya 1, Carmen Mindani 3, Osmar Cuentas 4, Cirilo Caira 5 and Walquer Huacani 6
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10316; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310316
Submission received: 31 May 2023 / Revised: 16 June 2023 / Accepted: 27 June 2023 / Published: 29 June 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript “Spatial Distribution of Soil Organic Carbon in Relation to Land use, Based on the Weighted Overlay Technique in the High Andean Ecosystem of Puno – Peru” investigated SOC distribution in the Andes under different land use types and different climate conditions, and emphasized the importance of spatial variation of SOC across the Andes. The results indicated that agricultural activity was a main factor regulating C stock, and SOC distribution varied with soil depth. This study provides an insight into the mechanism of soil C sequestration from the perspective of spatial scale in the Andes, which is crucial for sustainable land management. However, the manuscript should be revised to be more concise. In the discussion section, the mechanism of spatial variation in SOC should be analyzed in depth.

 

Specific comments:

L36-37: “Livestock activity did not significantly affect SOC reserves in the deeper soil profiles”----it is better not to present this result in Abstract since Livestock activity had only small effect.

L37-39: “Similarly, the climatological variables of altitude, slope, and land use play an essential role in the organic carbon stocks in the high Andean ecosystem of Puno – Peru”--- please put forward a proposal from the perspective of soil C or land use managements.

L50: “land use type” instead of “forest type”, and provide citations.

L53-54: it is not clear, delete.

L70-110: this paragraph is too long to get the central idea, it is better to divide into two parts.

L180-190: the estimation error is defined by Equation 5 and 6--- as a normal statistical test, is it necessary to be presented in the manuscript?

L231-240: Pearson's correlation coefficient is defined by Equation 8--- Pearson's correlation coefficient is a normal analysis method in most papers, so is it necessary to present this Equation 8? The same concern for the linear regression.

L297-298: The statistical analysis of the data was carried out by the test of hypothesis, through Pearson's correlation as a parametric statistical test, at a significance level of 95% (p < 0.05), which is assessed through the value of the correlation coefficient r

---delete the sentences from the Result section.

L350-355: The weighted overlay technique is a spatial modeling approach that combines multiple layers of spatial data, assigning weights to each layer to analyze their combined influence on a specific phenomenon, such as soil organic carbon (SOC) content. The weighted overlay analysis for identifying suitable locations utilizes a scale from 1 to 9, where 9 represents the best, and 1 is the worst suitability for each category [49]. We assign weights to each factor based on climate data analysis and environmental variables to assess the appropriate spatial of soil organic carbon.

--- the above sentences are suitable to appear in the Materials and Methods section.

L463-464: Please rewrite the sentence.

L468: Please check the sentence.

L518-526: These two paragraphs seem to have the same topic, and should be organized properly.

L537-544: it seems to be unsuitable to represent Pearson's correlation r in the Conclusion section, and Conclusion section should be revised to be more concise.

 


overall, the English language is fine

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript focuses on the spatial distribution of SOC(Soil organic carbon) in the high Andean ecosystem of Peru. It analyses 53 samples of 0 - 105 cm to obtain SOC in kg/m2 and organic matter (OM) (%). It uses the ordinary kriging method to determine SOC. It applied Pearson's statistical method to reveal the correlations of SOC between precipitation, temperature, altitude, and organic matter. The weighted overlay tool was used for modeling and mapping the spatial variability of SOC. The author confirms that regions with intensive agriculture have low reserves of SOC, and areas without agricultural activity but with grazing have average resources of SOC. The upper micro-watersheds where there is no agricultural activity, the reserves are high. This research shows livestock activity did not significantly affect SOC reserves in the deeper soil profiles.

In summary, the research demonstrated that the climatological variables of altitude, slope and land use play an essential role in the organic carbon stocks in the high Andean ecosystem of Puno - Peru.

Overall, the article is well organized and its presentation is good. However, some minor issues still need to be improved:

1) There are eight keywords, it is recommended to delete them appropriately.

2) The left part of Figure 1 is unclear, please provide the high-resolution figure.

3) Equation 3 includes a right parenthesis, please check it.

4) The unit should be kg/m2 instead of kg/m2, such as Line #166, Figure 6 and Figure 8, please check it.

5) Figure 4 can add the sampling locations, it may easy reading for readers.

6) The detailed sampling time should be provided, it can be shown in Table 2.

Since methods and results look appropriate and have important scientific significance, I believe the manuscript has good perspectives. So far, the authors should make minor revisions before re-submission. 

The overall quality is good, though some minor revisions are needed, and an minor editing is necessary.

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is of high quality and professional, the stated requirements have been incorporated remarkably, no other shortcomings and flaws have been observed. I recommend this manuscript to be accepted after minor revision.

1.       References required to formatted well according to the journal standard, many mistakes are there. Please revise it all.

2.       Please check the Eq 3.

3.       Please replace old references with more recent references.

4.       Please improve the quality of figure 3 (clearer font and colors).

5.       Please add the error range under each table.  

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop