The Climate Change Influence on Cedrela odorata L. Radial Growth in the Amazon
, João V. F. Latorraca 4, Victor H. P. Moutinho 1, Fábio H. D. J. Carmo 2, Glaycianne C. V. S. AtaÃde 2, Maristela Volpato 2, Diego L. Aguiar 1 and Fernando W. C. Andrade 1
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled “The climate change influence on Cedrela odorata L. radial growth in the Amazon” characterizes the intra and interannual behavior of local climatic variables near to Amazon River (1971 to 2017), and to evaluate the effect of these variables and the El Niño events on the radial growth of Cedrela odorata. The authors have used ring synchronization according to the standard methodology in dendrochronology. Climatic variables and ENSO were correlated to tree growth using Pearson's correlation analysis. The manuscript is written very well, and needs very little improvements.
Overall, I appreciate the authors for such valuable efforts and performance quality. I will highlight some minor changes in different sections of the manuscript, which may aid in improving quality.
Title: The title is good, it is specific and concise.
Abstract:
The abstract is well written, a little refining needed.
- I would suggest that authors avoid the use of first-person pronouns, this could enhance the flow and overall quality of presentation.
Introduction
The introduction is written well, but I found it too short. Some of the references used are older than 5 years.
Material and methods
Well written, good use of scientific language, I have the following suggestions
- Line 92: Revise for clarity
Results
Good language and great result data.
Figure 3: Can you describe the shaded/grey region of the graph?
Figure6 : the X and Y axis text is not visible.
Discussion and conclusion
Well written.
References
Almost half of the references used are older than 5 years.
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
Abstract
Comments 1: The abstract is well written, a little refining needed.
- I would suggest that authors avoid the use of first-person pronouns, this could enhance the flow and overall quality of presentation.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We changed the text as suggested.
Introduction
Comments 1: The introduction is written well, but I found it too short. Some of the references used are older than 5 years.
Response 1: Thanks for the observation. Changes have been made to the document.
Material and methods
Comments 1: Well written, good use of scientific language, I have the following suggestions.
- Line 92: Revise for clarity.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We revised the sentence.
Results
Comments 1: Figure 3: Can you describe the shaded/grey region of the graph?
Response 1: We changed as suggested., adding the following information: “The changing sample depth of dated radii is plotted in gray; solid gray line: standardized series; and solid black line: ring width index (RWI).”
Comments 2: Figure 6: the X and Y axis text is not visible.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We changed the X and Y axis text as suggested.
References
Comments 1: Almost half of the references used are older than 5 years.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing that out. The text has been revised.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
The paper needs improvements. Please check the comments on the PdF file.
Best
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
Abstract
Comments 1: Line 25
-Please present the quantitative results of your research, it is important for readers to know the quantitative information of the findings.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. However, after careful consideration, we have decided to maintain the current information as it is. The abstract section should be a total of about 200 words maximum, according to the instructions for authors, and after considering comments from all reviewers, it would be difficult to add this information on this section. We appreciate your understanding and thank you for your feedback.
Comments 2: Line 25
-Please present of all the findings, why in this abstract the non-significant results are not presented?
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We included this information on abstract section as suggested.
Introduction
Comments 1: Line 61 to 68
- Please provide the results of the previous studies, what are the correlations between the climate change properties with the tree's ring.
Response 1: Thanks for the comment. The text has been reformulated.
Comments 2: Line 61 to 68
- Add some information climate parameter that affect the tree's ring from the previous studies.
Response 2: Thanks for the suggestion. The text was rewritten considering your observation.
Material and methods
Comments 1: Line 102
- Please write the unit properly
Response 1: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 2: Line 119
- Move the last sentence to the previous paragraph. Please do not writ 1 paragraph only consist of 1 sentence.
Response 2: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 3: Line 131
- Move the last sentence to the previous paragraph. Please do not writ 1 paragraph only consist of 1 sentence.
Response 3: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 4: Lines 147-151
- Just integrate and make it 1 paragraph for these two paragraphs.
Response 4: We have made the necessary corrections.
Results
Comments 1: - Please improve all the graphs/figures, make firm graphs.
Response 1: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 2: Line 154
- Please do not make 1 paragraph only consists of 1 sentence.
Response 2: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 3: Figure 4
- Please use clearly different color or pattern for precipitation and temperature.
Response 3: We changed the patterns as suggested.
Comments 4: Lines 197-212
- Put of this data/information in a table, it is easier for the reader to understand.
Response 4: We remove the values of the correlations because the information was redundant. We already present this information on Figure 4.
Discussion
Comments 1: Line 252 “Current year”
- Please mention exactly the year, do not mention the current year, it will be different. If the reader read this year, it means 2023, and if the reader read this paper, then it means 2024.
Response 1: We changed for “period”, because it is related to previous and current months, used for analyses (Figure 5), not an exact year.
Comments 2: Line 289 “Tectona grandis”
- Please write in italic.
Response 2: Changed as suggested.
Conclusions
Comments 1: Improve the conclusions, make a 1 concise paragraph of your findings.
Response 1: Thanks for the comment. The text has been reformulated.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript entitled "The climate change influence on Cedrela odorata L. radial growth in the Amazon" scientifically evaluated the effect of the intra and interannual behaviour of local climatic variables and the El Niño events on the radial growth of C. odorata. The results were interesting and of value, suggesting that El Niño affects plant growth. Despite this, some parts of the manuscript need to be improved. Manuscripts in particular are worse in terms of writing. Hope the below comments will be able to help to further improve this work.
Abstract
Line 30 The study obtained good results. Is it possible to conclude the abstract with some recommendations for the future studies?
Introduction
Lines 52-55 The impact of climate change and El Niño indicators on the annual cycle should be the focus of the introduction to this manuscript. However, the current introduction contains only a very small general reference. More details of existing studies are needed here.
Materials and Methods
Line 91 While every sample is hard won, this sample size does seem a bit small.
Lines 113-121 What kind of data does this software produce? Can they tell us how the trees are growing each year or monthly? It's hard to understand this without being a very relevant researcher.
Lines 157-159 This is a poorly drawn figure.
Lines 198-199 Seems like a lot of variables, but they are essentially the same.
Lines 213-219 I don't understand what it means to diagram with Standard, Residual, and Arstan.
Discussion
Lines 228-231 The references in the manuscript are cited in a strange format, for example here [4] and [21]. We usually write out the author's name in this case. Other similar ones need to be corrected.
Lines 240-244 This information, which is directly related to the content of the study, should have been mentioned in the introduction. Includes the later case of annual rings about El Niño.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
Abstract
Comments 1: The study obtained good results. Is it possible to conclude the abstract with some recommendations for the future studies?
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We included this information on abstract section as suggested. “This work recommends new studies with other Amazon species aimed at better understand the impacts of climate change on tree dynamics.”
Introduction
Comments 1: Lines 52-55
- The impact of climate change and El Niño indicators on the annual cycle should be the focus of the introduction to this manuscript. However, the current introduction contains only a very small general reference. More details of existing studies are needed here.
Response 1: Thanks for the suggestion. The text was rewritten considering your observation.
Material and methods
Comments 1: Line 91
- While every sample is hard won, this sample size does seem a bit small.
Response 1: We agree with the reviewer that sampling is a preponderant factor that requires special attention in dendrochronological studies. In general, the average number of trees used in studies involving chronologies is 16 individuals (we work with 10), however, chronologies containing fewer individuals, originating from sampling using the destructive method, such as ours, in which the wooden disc is entire evaluated, make the analysis more precise and robust, even with smaller samples (BRIFFA & JONES, 1990; SCHWEINGRUBER et al., 1996). Furthermore, Fichtler (2017) reports that non-destructive sampling methods are not recommended for most tropical hardwood species.
The use of discs to construct chronologies facilitates the identification of rings that do not complete the circumference of the secondary xylem (false ring) or some injury that could interfere on the analysis (ESPER et al., 2001; EVERT, 2013), increasing the value of the master chronology and allow greater precision in dating, as it facilitates the identification of false and missing rings and other wood anomalies (FONTANA et a., 2018), which minimizes a need for greater sampling. As an example of this, in the present work, ten discs were collected and the ten obtained a significant correlation between them. When working with non-destructive sampling, two to six baguettes are generally collected per tree and at least 30% to 50% of the collected samples are discarded. Nothing was discarded in this work.
The number of trees in the chronologies also depends on the research objectives and cannot be stipulated generically (MÉRIAN et al., 2013). However, Briffa et al. (1990) suggests at least 5 trees (1 ray per tree), but they emphasize that the more individuals, the better. Schweingruber et al. (1996) recommend at least 10 individuals. Esper et al. (2001) also indicate 10 individuals but note that 20 trees can easily highlight local climate signals. Is important to cite that the authors consider these numbers for non-destructive samples. We worked inside of it with destructive samples, which gives better results.
Therefore, we appreciate the reviewer's concern, but we believe that the results presented, as well as the literature cited above, corroborate that the sampling was sufficient. BRIFFA, K. R.; JONES, P. D. Basic chronology statistics and assessment. In: Methods of dendrochronology: applications in the environmental sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 1990.
ESPER, J.; GÄRTNER, H. Interpretation of tree-ring chronologies. Erdkunde. N. 55. v. 3. 2001.
EVERT, R.F. Anatomia das Plantas de ESAU: meristemas, células e tecidos do corpo da planta: sua estrutura, função e desenvolvimento. Blucher. São Paulo. 728 p. 2013.
FICHTLER, E. Dendroclimatology using tropical broad-leaved tree species – A review. Erdkunde, n.71, v. 1. 2017.
FONTANA, C.; OLIVEIRA, J. M.; REIS-AVILA, G. et al. Dendrochronology and climate in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Which species, where and how. Neotropical Biology and Conservation. n 13, v. 4. 2018.
MÉRIAN, P.; PIERRAT, J.C.; LEBOURGEOIS. F. Effect of sampling effort on the regional chronology statistics and climate-growth relationships estimation. Dendrochronologia, n. 31, v.1. 2013.
SCHWEINGRUBER, F. H. Tree Rings and Environment: Dendroecology: Haupt Press, 1996.
Comments 2: Lines 113-121
- What kind of data does this software produce? Can they tell us how the trees are growing each year or monthly? It's hard to understand this without being a very relevant researcher.
Response 2: - What kind of data does this software produce?
The COFECHA software - Dating and measurement quality control - evaluates the quality of cross dating, the precision of ring measurement (GRISSINO-MAYER, 2010) and the synchronization of original measurements in dimensional indices. This allowed the individual series of tree measurements, with different annual growth rates, to be grouped into an average function with a minimum standard deviation and correcting the heterogeneity of the variance of the original data on the width of the growth rings. Thus, the COFECHA program carried out a quality control of the original measurements of the radial widths of the growth rings, calculating a “master” series from the set of the series of each disc.
The principle of the COFECHA program is to look for the similarity of growth rings between samples. It performs quality control on the ring width measurements of a set of trees, checking the synchronization between them to generate a master series (HOLMES, 1983). COFECHA uses quantitative parametric statistics with the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and produces several products at the end of the analysis. For this research, the intercorrelation coefficient and average sensitivity were used. The first to verify the existence of common growth characteristics, among the chronological series of growth rings analyzed, and the second to evaluate the impairment of growth resulting from environmental factors, as the more a tree has been limited by environmental factors, the greater will be the variation in the width of their growth rings.
ARSTAN produces growth ring chronologies by indexing (standardizing) ring series to remove biological growth bias and/or effects of disturbance and competition at the forest site. The application of autoregressive models generally increases the common signal (DOUGLASS, 1919).
The concept and methodology were developed by Edward R. Cook (Tree-Ring Laboratory, Lamont-Columbia University, New York) and Richard L. Holmes (TRL, Tucson, Arizona) programmed in the FORTRAN-77 format.
- Can they tell us how the trees are growing each year or monthly?
With growth ring measurements it is possible to present the annual increase for the physiological year.
GRISSINO-MAYER, H.D. Evaluating crossdating accuracy: a manual and tutorial for the computer program cofecha. Tree-ring Research, v. 57 (2). P. 205- 221. 2010.
HOLMES, R. L. Computer-assisted quality control in tree-ring dating and measurement. Tree-ring Bulletin. v. 43. p.69-78. 1983.
- It's hard to understand this without being a very relevant researcher?
It is not difficult to understand the results of the analyzes. You just need to understand what dendrochronology studies and what tools are used to carry out the analysis.
Dendrochronology: science that uses the growth rings of trees, dated in the exact years of their formation, to analyze the temporal and/or spatial patterns or processes of growth and its interaction with the environment.
Results
Comments 1: Lines 157-159
- This is a poorly drawn figure.
Response 1: Thanks for the observation. After analyzing the figure, we decided to remove the figure because it had the same information of Table 1.
Comments 2: Lines 198-199
- Seems like a lot of variables, but they are essentially the same.
Response 2: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. However, after careful consideration, we have decided to maintain the current information as it is. We appreciate your understanding and thank you for your feedback.
Comments 3: Lines 213-219
- I don't understand what it means to diagram with Standard, Residual, and Arstan.
Response 3: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. After careful consideration, we have decided to remove the Residual and Arstan information. The Standard, Residual and Arstan are chronologies produced on Arstan Software. Research usually use the Standard chronology, so we decided to present only this one.
Discussion
Comments 1: Lines 228-231
- The references in the manuscript are cited in a strange format, for example here [4] and [21]. We usually write out the author's name in this case. Other similar ones need to be corrected.
Response 1: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 2: Lines 240-244
- This information, which is directly related to the content of the study, should have been mentioned in the introduction. Includes the later case of annual rings about El Niño.
Response 2: We have made the necessary corrections.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSustainability- 5653298
Comments
The scholars have conducted an interesting work. But the article has severe technical deficiency. Following may be helpful to improve.
Title: Rephrase to relate with sustainability. The question arise from the title How can you relate your work with the sustainability like ecological, social, economic etc. or sustainability of studied species.
Why this species to see the impacts of climate change?
Concluding remark is poor. State here the possible application of the study.
Introduction is short and does not strengthen the need or importance of the conducted study.
State of the art is weak. Elaborate your theme of the study to justify the study.
It is reiterated in the intro and abstract that the species has great potential for dendrochronological studies. But how and why no any study cited.
At least justify your study with similar nature of work.
How, the study on this particular species underpin the conservation management of the forest or vegetation of the study area?
It is direly need to rephrase the objectives. Weakly presented here. What is it meant by in addition here in objectives. You should have clear cut objectives.
Materials and Methods: sampling is less for the given study. Is there any elevational belts. Or different ecosystem or habitat????
Data is limited. To generalize the findings with limited information will be illogical. In such cases synthesis becomes subjective.
How climatic data from 1971 to date was collected. Any source ???
Data analysis appropriate
Results: the information is weekly presented.
Tables are no clear for information.
Figures are blur and rough. Unable to read.
Discussion: there is no detail argument for outcomes. Comparative arguments are absent. Just repeating the results.
Conclusion: lacks key key findings and possible manipulation the study.
Good luck
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
Title
Comments 1: Rephrase to relate with sustainability. The question arise from the title How can you relate your work with the sustainability like ecological, social, economic etc. or sustainability of studied species.
Response 1: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. We chose to keep the title without including "sustainability" as the objective of the work was not directed towards sustainability, despite climate change influencing the growth of the species.
Introduction
Comments 1: Why this species to see the impacts of climate change?
Response 1: Every living being presents a physiological response to environmental variations. In trees, which present a physiological response to the annual formation of growth rings, that is, printed year after year in their anatomical structures, these variations are translated as temporal and spatial patterns of that environment.
Comments 2: Introduction is short and does not strengthen the need or importance of the conducted study.
Response 2: The introduction was entirely rewrite aiming to better explain the importance of the conducted study.
Comments 3: State of the art is weak. Elaborate your theme of the study to justify the study.
Response 3: When the introduction was re-elaborated, others scientific manuscripts were cited to improve the state of the art, as well to better justify the present study.
Comments 4: It is reiterated in the intro and abstract that the species has great potential for dendrochronological studies. But how and why no any study cited.
Response 4: It is well cited now. Thank you for the observation.
Comments 5: At least justify your study with similar nature of work.
Response 5: Done.
Comments 6: How, the study on this particular species underpin the conservation management of the forest or vegetation of the study area?
Response 6: In different ways. At first, with the annuity proof, it can stipulate the management cycle for that specie, as well for others with the same growth parameter. With combined dendrochronological studies, others forest management methods can be tested, improving the ono that already is running in Brazilian Amazonia.
Comments 7: It is direly need to rephrase the objectives. Weakly presented here. What is it meant by in addition here in objectives. You should have clear cut objectives.
Response 7: Thanks for the comment. The text has been reformulated.
Material and methods
Comments 1: Sampling is less for the given study. Is there any elevational belts. Or different ecosystem or habitat????
Response 1: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. The ecossystem was the same for all samples, including the same soil. Also, the average number of trees used in studies involving chronologies is 16 individuals (we work with 10) for non-destructive sampling, however, chronologies containing fewer individuals, originating from sampling using the destructive method, such as ours, in which the wooden disc is entire evaluated, make the analysis more precise and robust, even with smaller samples (BRIFFA & JONES, 1990; SCHWEINGRUBER et al., 1996). Furthermore, Fichtler (2017) reports that non-destructive sampling methods are not recommended for most tropical hardwood species.
BRIFFA, K. R.; JONES, P. D. Basic chronology statistics and assessment. In: Methods of dendrochronology: applications in the environmental sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 1990.
FICHTLER, E. Dendroclimatology using tropical broad-leaved tree species – A review. Erdkunde, n.71, v. 1. 2017.
SCHWEINGRUBER, F. H. Tree Rings and Environment: Dendroecology: Haupt Press, 1996.
Comments 2: Data is limited. To generalize the findings with limited information will be illogical. In such cases synthesis becomes subjective.
Response 2: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. However, this is a pioneering study to understand the behavior of the species in the region.
Comments 3: How climatic data from 1971 to date was collected. Any source???
Response 3: All data were obtained from the Conventional Meteorological Station of Óbidos-PA (85178) of the National Institute of Meteorology (INMET), located in the municipality of Óbidos-PA.
Comments 4: Data analysis appropriate
Response 4: thanks.
Results
Comments 1: The information is weekly presented.
Response 1: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 2: Tables are no clear for information.
Response 2: We have made the necessary corrections on Tables.
Comments 3: Figures are blur and rough. Unable to read.
Response 3: We have made the necessary corrections on Figures.
Discussion
Comments 1: There is no detail argument for outcomes. Comparative arguments are absent. Just repeating the results.
Response 1: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. We have made the necessary corrections on the text.
Conclusions:
Comments 1: Concluding remark is poor. State here the possible application of the study.
Response 1: Thank you for taking the time to share your comment with us. We reformulated the conclusions.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe size of n =30 is very low to have a valid analysis of the results
there is no evapotranspiration data.
there is no soil analysis report of the area to know the effects of soils or soil on the growth of trees.
Rest of the comments are given on the annotated text of the article.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
Material and methods
Comments 1: - The size of n =30 is very low to have a valid analysis of the results
Response 1: We agree with the reviewer that sampling is a preponderant factor that requires special attention in dendrochronological studies. In general, the average number of trees used in studies involving chronologies is 16 individuals (we work with 10), however, chronologies containing fewer individuals, originating from sampling using the destructive method, such as ours, in which the wooden disc is entire evaluated, make the analysis more precise and robust, even with smaller samples (BRIFFA & JONES, 1990; SCHWEINGRUBER et al., 1996). Furthermore, Fichtler (2017) reports that non-destructive sampling methods are not recommended for most tropical hardwood species.
The use of discs to construct chronologies facilitates the identification of rings that do not complete the circumference of the secondary xylem (false ring) or some injury tha could interfere on the analysis (ESPER et al., 2001; EVERT, 2013), increasing the value of the master chronology and allow greater precision in dating, as it facilitates the identification of false and missing rings and other wood anomalies (FONTANA et a., 2018), which minimizes a need for greater sampling. As an example of this, in the present work, ten discs were collected and the ten obtained a significant correlation between them. When working with non-destructive sampling, two to six baguettes are generally collected per tree and at least 30% to 50% of the collected samples are discarded. Nothing was discarted in this work.
The number of trees in the chronologies also depends on the research objectives and cannot be stipulated generically (MÉRIAN et al., 2013). However, Briffa et al. (1990) suggest at least 5 trees (1 ray per tree), but they emphasize that the more individuals, the better. Schweingruber et al. (1996) recommend at least 10 individuals. Esper et al. (2001) also indicate 10 individuals, but note that 20 trees can easily highlight local climate signals. Is important to cite that the authors consider these numbers for non-destructive samples. We worked inside of it with destructive samples, wich gives better results.
Therefore, we appreciate the reviewer's concern, but we believe that the results presented, as well as the literature cited above, corroborate that the sampling was sufficient. BRIFFA, K. R.; JONES, P. D. Basic chronology statistics and assessment. In: Methods of dendrochronology: applications in the environmental sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 1990.
ESPER, J.; GÄRTNER, H. Interpretation of tree-ring chronologies. Erdkunde. N. 55. v. 3. 2001.
EVERT, R.F. Anatomia das Plantas de ESAU: meristemas, células e tecidos do corpo da planta: sua estrutura, função e desenvolvimento. Blucher. São Paulo. 728 p. 2013.
FICHTLER, E. Dendroclimatology using tropical broad-leaved tree species – A review. Erdkunde, n.71, v. 1. 2017.
FONTANA, C.; OLIVEIRA, J. M.; REIS-AVILA, G. et al. Dendrochronology and climate in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Which species, where and how. Neotropical Biology and Conservation. n 13, v. 4. 2018.
MÉRIAN, P.; PIERRAT, J.C.; LEBOURGEOIS. F. Effect of sampling effort on the regional chronology statistics and climate-growth relationships estimation. Dendrochronologia, n. 31, v.1. 2013.
SCHWEINGRUBER, F. H. Tree Rings and Environment: Dendroecology: Haupt Press, 1996.
Comments 2: There is no evapotranspiration data.
Response 2: All data were obtained from the Conventional Meteorological Station of Óbidos-PA (85178), of the National Institute of Meteorology (INMET), located in the municipality of Óbidos-PA. To consult the data in INMET, simply access the website https://bdmep.inmet.gov.br/
Below I present the table of real evapotranspiration data that was extracted from the INMET website.
Table 1. Real evapotranspiration data from the city of Óbidos-PA, Brazil
|
Anos |
January |
February |
March |
April |
May |
June |
July |
August |
September |
October |
November |
December |
|
2006 |
108,100 |
124,710 |
129,905 |
130,616 |
146,280 |
141,278 |
59,922 |
18,200 |
18,000 |
74,800 |
65,500 |
110,400 |
|
2007 |
134,637 |
118,539 |
117,303 |
118,084 |
126,971 |
135,800 |
100,550 |
36,505 |
53,599 |
114,761 |
158,609 |
144,607 |
|
2008 |
146,945 |
117,799 |
129,905 |
132,480 |
119,815 |
130,845 |
82,318 |
24,904 |
3,337 |
18,900 |
52,373 |
159,403 |
|
2009 |
156,986 |
143,284 |
166,797 |
142,094 |
156,694 |
146,114 |
144,077 |
120,645 |
79,008 |
71,586 |
164,608 |
154,979 |
|
2010 |
130,839 |
121,218 |
137,526 |
126,879 |
144,218 |
126,230 |
85,506 |
91,556 |
39,989 |
56,816 |
162,321 |
154,804 |
|
2011 |
150,606 |
120,193 |
133,591 |
140,072 |
131,273 |
64,397 |
89,190 |
74,868 |
55,152 |
42,046 |
66,890 |
157,100 |
|
2012 |
142,423 |
124,657 |
141,407 |
138,145 |
148,287 |
121,428 |
91,031 |
150,406 |
101,917 |
31,217 |
164,619 |
80,905 |
|
2013 |
146,473 |
119,438 |
137,468 |
136,218 |
140,230 |
135,847 |
92,873 |
32,786 |
41,439 |
31,899 |
89,847 |
44,156 |
|
2014 |
142,423 |
124,657 |
127,974 |
132,424 |
140,230 |
92,407 |
139,454 |
23,738 |
5,174 |
32,581 |
35,715 |
29,524 |
|
2015 |
151,800 |
130,949 |
139,406 |
136,199 |
149,059 |
119,644 |
70,233 |
44,195 |
29,470 |
48,256 |
39,509 |
95,486 |
|
2016 |
136,504 |
114,380 |
127,974 |
138,145 |
152,441 |
133,530 |
83,597 |
17,209 |
2,973 |
62,084 |
51,482 |
161,449 |
|
2017 |
108,100 |
124,710 |
129,905 |
130,616 |
146,280 |
141,278 |
59,922 |
18,200 |
18,000 |
74,800 |
65,500 |
110,400 |
Comments 3: There is no soil analysis report of the area to know the effects of soils or soil on the growth of trees.
Response 3: No soil analysis was carried out for the studied area.
For this research, the intercorrelation coefficient and average sensitivity were used. The first to verify the existence of common growth characteristics, among the chronological series of growth rings analyzed, and the second to evaluate the impairment of growth resulting from environmental factors, since the more a tree has been limited by environmental factors, the greater the the variation in the width of their growth rings.
Comments 4: Line 92 “Second semester” - what is the length of semester. How many semesters in one year- not clear.
Response 4: Thanks for the observation.
To clarify, one semester corresponds to six months. The first half of the year corresponds to the months of January, February, March, April, May and June. The second semester corresponds to the months of July, August, September, October, November and December.
The research material was collected in October 2018. Corrections were made to the text.
Comments 5: Lines 95-97 - what was the method of collection and identification - any reference or keys- who is expert - who identified- give credit to him by writing his name here - not clear
Response 5: Thanks for the observation. The correction was made to the text.
Comments 6: Line 103 - what were the properties of compressed air jet e.g., pressure
Response 6: Thanks for the observation. The correction was made to the text.
Comments 7: please add soil analysis of the area to confirm if the trees grew under similar or dissimilar conditions to avoid error in calculations and estimates.
Response 7: No soil analysis was carried out in the area.
Below we list a series of works that carried out dendrochronological research and that also did not carry out soil analysis.
- MENEZES, I. R. N.; ARAGÃO, J. R. V.; PAGOTTO, M. A.; LISI, C. S. Teleconnections and edaphoclimatic effects on tree growth of Cedrela odorata L. in a seasonally dry tropical forest in Brazil. Dendrochronologia. v. 72. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2022.125923.
- PAGOTTO, M.A., MENEZES, I.R.N., COSTA, C.M. et al. Oxygen isotopes in tree rings of Cedrela odorata L. na an indicator of hydroclimate variations in a seasonally dry tropical forest in northeastern Brazil. Trees. V. 35, p.1889–1903. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-021-02158-z.
- SANTOS, G. M.; GRANATO-SOUZA, D.; BARBOSA, A. C.; OELKERS, R., ANDREU-HAYLES, L. Radiocarbon analysis confirms annual periodicity in Cedrela odorata tree rings from the equatorial Amazon. Quaternary Geochronology. Volume 58. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2020.101079.
- SANTOS, G. M.; GRANATO-SOUZA, D.; BARBOSA, A. C.; OELKERS, R., ANDREU-HAYLES, L. Radiocarbon analysis confirms annual periodicity in Cedrela odorata tree rings from the equatorial Amazon. Quaternary Geochronology. Volume 58. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2020.101079.
- SOUSA, L. K. V. S. Dendrocronologia aplicada no manejo de árvores de cedro (Cedrela odorata) L. e jatobá (Hymenaea courbaril) L. ocorrentes na FLONA Tapajós, PA. Tese (Doutorado) - Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Piracicaba. 133 p. 2019.
- GRANATO-SOUZA, D.; STAHLE, D.; BARBOSA, M. C. Tree rings and rainfall in the equatorial Amazon. Climate Dynamics. 52. 2019.
- LAYME-HUAMAN, E.T.; FERRERO, M.E.; PALACIOS-LAZARO, K.S.; REQUENA-ROJAS, E. J. Cedrela nebulosa: A novel species for dendroclimatological studies in the montane tropics of South America. Dendrochronologia, v. 50. 2018.
- BARBOSA, A.C.M.; PEREIRA, G.A.; GRANATO-SOUZA, D.; SANTOS, R.M.; FONTES, M.A.L. Tree rings and growth trajectories of tree species from seasonally dry tropical forest. Australian Journal of Botany. 14p. 2018.
- INGA, J.G.; DEL VALLE, J.I. Log-relative growth: A new dendrochronological approach to study diameter growth in Cedrela odorata and Juglans neotropica, Central Forest, Peru. Dendrochronologia. v.44. 2017.
- ESPINOZA, M. J. P.; GUILLEN, G. J. I.; MORAES, M. S.; ARESMENDES, R. R. Potencialidad de Cedrela odorata (Meliaceae) para estúdios dendrocronológico en la selva central del Perú. Revista Biologica Tropical. São José. Vol. 62. 2014.
- ANHOLETTO JUNIOR, C. Dendroecologia e composição isotópica (δ13C) dos anéis de crescimento de árvores de Cedrela odorata, Meliaceae, na Caatinga e Mata Atlântica do Estado de Sergipe, Brasil. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Florestais) – Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”, Universidade de São Paulo, Piracicaba, 96 p. 2013.
- GUEROVICH, A. S. Dendrocronología del cedro Cedrela odorata L. (Meliaceae) de la Amazonia sur del Perú, la región Madre de Dios. Tesis para optar el grado de Magíster Scientiae. Escuela de Postgrado Especialidad en Bosques y Gestion de Recursos Forestales, Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina. p. 147. 2011.
- LOBÃO, M. S. Dendocronologia, fenologia, atividade cambial e qualidade do lenho de árvores de Cedrela odorata L., Cedrela fissilis Vell. e Schizolobium parahyba var. amazonicum Hub. ex Ducke, no estado do Acre, Brasil. Tese (Doutorado) - Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz. Piracicaba. p. 215. 2011.
- RAUBER, R. C. Dendrocronologia de Cedrela fissilis Vell. Em um ecótono de Florestas Subtropicais Montanas no Brasil. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ecologia) – Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre – RS. p. 80. 2010.
- BRIENEM, R.J.W.; ZUIDEMA, P.A. Relating tree growth to rainfall in Bolivian rain forests: a test for six species using tree ring analysis. Oecologia, n. 146, v. 1. 2005.
Results
Comments 1: Line 163 - We can not say this in the absence of soil analysis data. Rewrite after checking the soil analysis data.
Response 1: No soil analysis was carried out in the area.
A list of series of works that carried out dendrochronological research and that also did not carry out soil analysis are present in the Response 7 of Material and Methods section.
Discussion
Comments 1: Lines 228-236 - No one is interested in this type of sentences explain long years data and present data if applicable.
Response: We consider this information is important to explain next paragraph.
Comments 2: Lines 234-236 - Please do not use present tense. use past tense only.
Response 2: We have made the necessary corrections.
Comments 3: Lines 237-238 - What was the soil moisture level of this area we do not have any information. Take help of meteorology or describe it in terms of rainfall only.
Response 3: We changed as suggested. “Regions with well-defined seasonality such as this may impact the demarcation of growth rings due to the variation in rainfall over the year.”
Comments 4: Line 243 “moisture recharge” - What is level of this charge in the experimental area?
Response 4: Here we considered the moisture recharge as the beginning of the rainy season.
Comments 5: Lines 251-253 - Revise - these sentences have no value in the absence of soil analysis and knowledge about the water holding capacity of the soil.
Response 5: No soil analysis was carried out in the area.
A list of series of works that carried out dendrochronological research and that also did not carry out soil analysis are present in the Response 7 of Material and Methods section.
Comments 6: Lines 259-271 - The information is correct, but it has no value in the absence of knowledge about the rate of evapotranspiration of the trees used in the study at different intervals of time. All information is speculative.
Response 6: We agree that we did not carry out a specific study on the evapotranspiration rate of the trees used in the study but some of this information explains reasons why this relationship may have occurred.
Comments 7: Lines 277-281 - Take it to conclusion.
Response 7: Thank you for your consideration. We made changes to the conclusion section.
Comments 8: Line 285 “soil moisture conditions” - We do not know soil moisture conditions. We do not know the characteristics of soil we have data about precipitation only. We can not write it. we should be careful. This paragraph is more conclusion than discussion.
Response 8: The “soil moisture conditions” mentioned in this sentence refer to what was studied in the work of Venegas-Gonzales et al (2018).
Conclusions:
Comments 1: Line 298 “Real evapotranspiration” - How can we say it without having real evapotranspiration data.
Response 1: Thank you for your consideration. However, we used data on Real Evapotranspiration in the study. So, after consideration, we decided to maintain the words.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 6 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Hello authors!
I enjoyed reviewing your interesting paper. There are, however, a couple of minor and serious problems which I invite you to address.
A → B means that I suggest that A should become B
Generic comments G
G1 - A note about wording, especially stereotyped expressions
The language of the paper is generally fine. There are, however, some stereotyped expressions that the authors may wish to modify, for instance;
forest vegetation → forest (all forest is vegetation)
drought events → drought (drought does not "happen" like a thunderstorm. It is a so-called "slow onset disaster". Therefore it is simpler and more correct to just say drought
ENSO event → ENSO (ENSO is not an event but a phenomenon)
environmental climate → climate or, maybe, prevailing climate (line 53)
G2 - About your use of January to December seasons
Coordinates and growing season: the samples are taken from a location that is at about 50 km from the weather station, at a similar altitude. Based on New-FAOCLIM data, it seems that the sampled locations are somewhat wetter than Obibos. The main difficulty I see, however, is that the “biological” growing season is from September to August, with the “middle of the dry season” at the end of August. What this means is that the rainfall of the calendar year as used in this publication, say 2020, includes rainfall of the September 2019- August 2020 season as well as rainfall that belongs to the September 2020 -August 2021. Approximately 80% of rain falls from January to August and thus 20% from September to December.
It also frequently happens in tropical tress that they are photoperiodic. The best know example is that of Jacaranda, which develops leaves and flowers before the beginning of the rainy season. It is not known to the writer how this is synchronised with growth. However, should C. odorata have a similar behaviour, much of the 2020 development would depend on late 2019 rain.
The authors must clarify this issue, and provide some evidence about the timing of the actual growth of C. odorata. There is indeed the risk that the growth rings assigned to the 2020 season are mostly driven by late 2019 rainfall.
Specific comments, referred to line numbers
20: near to Amazon River → close to the Amazon River
21: Cedrela odorata → Cedrela odorata L.
Comment: indicate author name on first occurrence
25-27: We observed significant negative correlations for maximum and average temperatures and evapotranspiration and significant positive correlations for precipitation and relative humidity with species growth → We observed significant correlations with growth, negative for maximum and average temperatures and evapotranspiration and positive for precipitation and relative humidity
31, 58, 94, 98: Cedar → Cuban cedar or Brazilian cedar
Comment: in English, most readers will interpret Cedar as Cedrus, an Old world coniferous tree. In Spanish and Portuguese as well, Cedro usually identifies the tree of the family Pinaceae. Cedrela odorata, on the other hand, is a New world plant belonging to the Meliaceae. Although it is known locally as Cedro, it’s English name is not cedar, but “Cuban Cedar” or “Spanish Cedar” or, I discovered on line 98, “Brazilian Cedar”. Or you can also say on the first mention of the word and in the abstract that whenever you say in lines 31 and 58 that by “Cedar” in this paper, you mean Cedrela cedar. You could also modify the title to read The climate change influence on the radial growth of Brazilian cedar (Cedrela odorata L.) in the Amazon basin
33-35: The Amazon Forest is a fundamental component of the global climate, presenting unique and highly relevant climatic characteristics. Among them, periods of drought are especially significant, as they severely impact some regions
Comment: there is a problem with the logic of this sentence, i.e. a partial confusion of climate and forest. The sentence seems to indicate that drought is a characteristic of the forest.
61: complacency
Comment: this is not the correct word
64: for assessing sensitivity to climate variations → for assessing climate variations
79 and 80: 55°34’31.43” W, and 01°30’43.82” S
Comment: there is something wrong with the coordinates. Two values are expected (latitude and longitude) for each point or even 8 values if you provide the coordinates of the opposite corners of the two areas illustrated in Figure 1. You could also use decimal coordinates, which are much easier to read than the antique degrees, minutes and seconds. For instance, the Fazenda Afelândia buildings are at 1.5158°S (or -1.5158°) and 55.6000°W (or -55.6000°).
125: real evapotranspiration
Comment: this should probably be “actual” evapotranspiration (as opposed to “potential” evapotranspiration.) Please indicate is this is measured or computed, and how it was measured or computed (e.g. FAO-Penman, Blaney-Criddle, etc.)
126-127:
Comment: please provide the exact coordinates of the station of Obidos. There are at least two stations: one by the river and one near the airport.
149: all data. and growth, with
Comment: is some text missing?
158:
Comment: this figure is not extremely clear. The two last lines could be written to the right of D1, D2 etc. to D10
190: figure 4
Comment: kindly change Dez to Dec(ember)
194: Table 2
I fail to understand how this table was obtained. For precipitation and months I read -0.435, for instance. Did you "correlate" variables with month numbers and with year numbers? This may be OK for years, but is definitely wrong for months. Please clarify on which data exactly the numbers were obtained (e.g. by providing their number N). I looked up the paper which you quote as the source for the Mann-Kendall test. The paper does not mention the word "correlation". It has a lot about autocorrelation with the time series, but the authors nowhere define nor use "correlation". What is this statitic which you call correlation? This all needs clarification.
(My review ends here)
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The language is mostly fine. I have made some suggestions for improvement to the authors
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
forest
Comments 1: forest vegetation → forest (all forest is vegetation)
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We made the necessary corrections through the text.
Comments 2: drought events → drought (drought does not "happen" like a thunderstorm. It is a so-called "slow onset disaster". Therefore it is simpler and more correct to just say drought
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We made the necessary corrections through the text.
Comments 3: ENSO event → ENSO (ENSO is not an event but a phenomenon)
Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We made the necessary corrections through the text.
Comments 4: environmental climate → climate or, maybe, prevailing climate (line 53)
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We made the necessary corrections through the text.
G2 - About your use of January to December seasons
Coordinates and growing season: the samples are taken from a location that is at about 50 km from the weather station, at a similar altitude. Based on New-FAOCLIM data, it seems that the sampled locations are somewhat wetter than Óbidos. The main difficulty I see, however, is that the “biological” growing season is from September to August, with the “middle of the dry season” at the end of August. What this means is that the rainfall of the calendar year as used in this publication, say 2020, includes rainfall of the September 2019- August 2020 season as well as rainfall that belongs to the September 2020 -August 2021. Approximately 80% of rain falls from January to August and thus 20% from September to December.
It also frequently happens in tropical tress that they are photoperiodic. The best-known example is that of Jacaranda, which develops leaves and flowers before the beginning of the rainy season. It is not known to the writer how this is synchronized with growth. However, should C. odorata have a similar behavior, much of the 2020 development would depend on late 2019 rain.
Comments 5: The authors must clarify this issue and provide some evidence about the timing of the actual growth of C. odorata. There is indeed the risk that the growth rings assigned to the 2020 season are mostly driven by late 2019 rainfall.
Response 5: Thank you for your consideration. We have assigned the ring dates according to the year when the trees start growing. In dendrochronology studies, researchers assign the ring dates according to the year when the rings start their formation. This is called Schulman’s convention.
Abstract
Comments 1: Line 20: near to Amazon River → close to the Amazon River
Response 1: Changed as suggested.
Comments 2: Line 21: Cedrela odorata → Cedrela odorata L.
Response 2: Changed as suggested.
Comments 3: Lines 25-27: We observed significant negative correlations for maximum and average temperatures and evapotranspiration and significant positive correlations for precipitation and relative humidity with species growth → We observed significant correlations with growth, negative for maximum and average temperatures and evapotranspiration and positive for precipitation and relative humidity.
Response 3: Changed as suggested.
Introduction
Comments 1: Lines 31, 58, 94, 98: Cedar → Cuban cedar or Brazilian cedar?
Comment: in English, most readers will interpret Cedar as Cedrus, an Old world coniferous tree. In Spanish and Portuguese as well, Cedro usually identifies the tree of the family Pinaceae. Cedrela odorata, on the other hand, is a New world plant belonging to the Meliaceae. Although it is known locally as Cedro, it’s English name is not cedar, but “Cuban Cedar” or “Spanish Cedar” or, I discovered on line 98, “Brazilian Cedar”. Or you can also say on the first mention of the word and in the abstract that whenever you say in lines 31 and 58 that by “Cedar” in this paper, you mean Cedrela cedar. You could also modify the title to read The climate change influence on the radial growth of Brazilian cedar (Cedrela odorata L.) in the Amazon basin.
Response 1: It’s Brazilian Cedar. We made the necessary changes.
Comments 2: Lines 33-35: The Amazon Forest is a fundamental component of the global climate, presenting unique and highly relevant climatic characteristics. Among them, periods of drought are especially significant, as they severely impact some regions.
Comment: there is a problem with the logic of this sentence, i.e. a partial confusion of climate and forest. The sentence seems to indicate that drought is a characteristic of the forest.
Response 2: Yes, drought is a characteristic of the Amazon Rainforest.
Figure 1. Climatological water balance for the municipality of Óbidos-PA.
figure 2. 2 - Water storage in the soil of Óbidos-PA.
Comments 3: Line 61: complacency.
Comment: this is not the correct word.
Response 3: Thanks for the observation. The term has been corrected in the text.
Comments 4: Line 64: for assessing sensitivity to climate variations → for assessing climate variations.
Response 3: Thanks for the observation. But sensitivity, in dendrochronology, refers to the variability in ring width (MATTOS et al., 2011).
MATTOS, P. P.; BRAZ, E. M.; HESS, A. F.; SALIS, S. M. Dendrocronologia e o manejo florestal sustentável em florestas tropicais. Ed. 21. Colombo. Embrapa Florestas. Documento 112. p. 37. 2011.
Material and methods
Comments 1: Lines 79 and 80: 55°34’31.43” W, and 01°30’43.82” S.
Comment: there is something wrong with the coordinates. Two values are expected (latitude and longitude) for each point or even 8 values if you provide the coordinates of the opposite corners of the two areas illustrated in Figure 1. You could also use decimal coordinates, which are much easier to read than the antique degrees, minutes and seconds. For instance, the Fazenda Afelândia buildings are at 1.5158°S (or -1.5158°) and 55.6000°W (or -55.6000°).
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We changed the coordinates as suggested. “LAR – Nº 13071/2018 (1.470134°S 55.605361°W) and Afelândia Farm – AUTEF – No. 273229/2018 / Rural Environmental License – LAR – No. 13071/2019 (1.512803°S 55.571283°W) (Figure 1).”
Comments 2: Line 125: real evapotranspiration.
Comment: this should probably be “actual” evapotranspiration (as opposed to “potential” evapotranspiration.) Please indicate is this is measured or computed, and how it was measured or computed (e.g. FAO-Penman, Blaney-Criddle, etc.)
Response 2: Yes, "real" or effective evapotranspiration was worked on, which is the loss of water through evaporation or transpiration, under the prevailing conditions (atmospheric and soil humidity). Measure with a Weighing Lysimeter
Comments 3: Lines 126-127:
Comment: please provide the exact coordinates of the station of Óbidos. There are at least two stations: one by the river and one near the airport.
Response 3: -1.88, -55.52
Comments 4: Line 149: all data. and growth, with
Comment: is some text missing?
Response 4: We made the necessary changes.
Results
Comments 1: Line 158:
Comment: this figure is not extremely clear. The two last lines could be written to the right of D1, D2 etc. to D10.
Response 1: We removed the figure because it had the same information of Table 1.
Comments 2: Line 190: figure 4.
Comment: kindly change Dez to Dec(ember)
Response 2: Changed as suggested.
Comments 3: Line 194: Table 2
I fail to understand how this table was obtained. For precipitation and months, I read -0.435, for instance. Did you "correlate" variables with month numbers and with year numbers? This may be OK for years but is definitely wrong for months. Please clarify on which data exactly the numbers were obtained (e.g. by providing their number N). I looked up the paper which you quote as the source for the Mann-Kendall test. The paper does not mention the word "correlation". It has a lot about autocorrelation with the time series, but the authors nowhere define nor use "correlation". What is this statistic which you call correlation? This all-needs clarification.
Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We revised the Table 2 and decided to remove the correlation between meteorological variables and month because we made a mistake on the analyses. We apologize for it. The statistic was Mann-Kendall correlation tau. We include information about it in the Table 2 description and in Material and Methods section.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
There are still some things that should be corrected before publication.
Regards
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewers Comments
Abstract
Comment 1: Lines 23 - 26
-Please check again wether the correlation is negatif or positif, also the significancy. For example, minimum temperature the significant correlation is 0.467 according to Table2. As it was asked in the first review, please write the value of the significancy, for intance: The growth-rings has significant correlation with mean temperature (r = 0.236), minimum temperature (r = 0.467),.....
Response 1: We appreciate your consideration. However, the abstract addresses the correlations between growth and local climate variables (Figure 4). We have improved the wording of this topic to make the information clearer.
Materials and Methods
Comment 1: Line 126
-From the previous comment, it was asked to write in the proper unit. Is it right in mm or square millimeter?, if square millimeter please write the sign of 2 in superscript.
Response 1: The correct unit is grains/mm². We corrected the text.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have appropriately addressed the reviewers’ comments. According to the current version, I have no further comments and recommend to accept.
Author Response
We appreciate the reviewer's comments.
Reviewer 6 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI have no additional comments
Author Response
We appreciate the reviewer's comments.
