Particle Size Distribution and Depth to Bedrock of Chinese Cultivated Soils: Implications for Soil Classification and Management

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Thank you for considering the reviewers’ comments and deleting the authors’ proposal in the revised manuscript. However, the revised manuscript should not be accepted for publication in Agronomy for the following reasons.

As I commented earlier, particle size distribution and the depth to bed rock are inherent soil (or land) properties. As a result of soil erosion, sedimentation, and weathering, these properties may reflect the stage of soil development, and may therefore be related to soil taxonomic names for natural soils. As far as these two properties are concerned, however, I disagree with the authors’ assumption that more crop production makes the soils developed on agricultural fields to have similar range of properties over time. Accordingly, the authors succeeded in answering the first research objective but failed to give scientific insights to the second and third objectives, which are the scientific part of the study. Soil is a continuous entity and soil taxonomic names of any kind are rather qualitative and arbitrary. Whether an irrigated paddy soil is classified into Fluvisol or Anthrosol depends on the researchers’ preference and nationality. So, please present the data more quantitatively including the relationship among soil, land and environmental properties, e.g., the relationship between soil particle size and depth to bed rock, in order to answer to the second research objective.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Most of the comments from the previous review have been taken into account.

In the article, the spatial variability of the depth to bed rock and grain size distribution (texture) of agricultural soils in China was studied. As I indicated in the first review - the depth to bedrock (if it is really so deep as it is stated in article) is completely irrelevant from the point of view of soil classification - in all cases the depth was beyond the scope of interest of soil classification. Nevertheless, it is surprising that in the Qinghai Tibet Plateau, at 22% Leptosols, the depth ranged from 84 to 164 m. 

The authors also mix the terms from the FAO and WRB classifications without giving explanations in which system they were classified in the article soil (how was FAO reclassified into WRB?)

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Thank you for considering the reviewers’ comments. However, the revised manuscript should not be accepted for publication in Agronomy for the following reasons. This is the third review for this manuscript, and is therefore the final decision. 

In response to my comment that soil taxonomic names of any kind are rather qualitative and arbitrary, the authors replied that the soil type data are from the National Tibetan Plateau Data Center and that the classification standard has a strict definition. This notwithstanding, the authors did not change their proposal that it would be more practical to classify all the cultivated soils as Anthrosols, regardless of presence of diagnostic horizons or other prerequisites (L306-309). The authors’ reply to the reviewer’s comment contradicts with the authors’ proposal in the manuscript. 

I disagree with the authors’ description that the similar goal of more crop production in agroecosystems makes similarities in the range of various soil properties over time and leads to the formation of a group of soils, which are classified as Anthrosols in FAO-90 (L261-263). This description is not based on the evidence of data presented in the manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Dear Dr. Xiaoning Zhao

Thank you for taking the comments into consideration. In the manuscript, the authors summarized the particle size distribution and soil depth to bedrock of Chinese cultivated land. I do not think that the authors contributed to the second objective with scientific evidence: How do the typical geographical characteristics and climate influence the rate of soil development on cultivated land? But the manuscript has been reviewed several times, and the presented data could be useful for other soil scientists.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The title of the article as well as the general assumptions sound very interesting, and considering the great importance of China's agricultural soils in the global scale of food production, the issues set out in the objectives of the work are very important.

In the article, the spatial variability of the depth to bed rock and grain size distribution (texture) of agricultural soils in China was studied. The first parameter is completely irrelevant from the point of view of soil classification - in all cases the depth was beyond the scope of interest of soil classification. Nevertheless, it is surprising that in the Qinghai Tibet Plateau, at 22% Leptosols, the depth ranged from 84 to 164 m. These figures appear to be incorrect. The second parameter, texture, is indeed very important, but no attempt was made in the discussion to interpret the data obtained.

The authors should rethink and completely reconstruct the structure of the article - perhaps only the texture of agricultural soils should be analyzed in the context of other environmental factors? Of course, the whole discussion needs to be rewritten. In its present form, the manuscript has no significant scientific value and should not be published in a scientific journal.

I also send some minor comments in the attached manuscript file.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The data presented in the manuscript are particle size distribution and depth to bed rock, which are considered as inherent soil (or land) properties. Using these data, the authors attempted to evaluate the relationship between soil types, soil texture and soil depth to bedrock of cultivated land in Chinese agricultural sector. However, the results presented in the manuscript are soil differences among different regions. Furthermore, the research aim that the authors considered was to find out how long-term agricultural practices control soil development and how local climatic and topographic conditions may modify the rate of soil development in agroecosystems. To this end, the quantitative information on the past agricultural management, local climatic conditions as well as local topographic conditions should be provided in the manuscript and these properties need to be related to soil properties including the depth to bed rock. Therefore, the conclusion proposed by the authors is not supported by the data presented in the manuscript. Due to the lack of evidence supporting the authors’ proposal, the manuscript should not be accepted for publication in Agronomy.