Comparison of Changes in Soil Moisture Content Following Rainfall in Different Subtropical Plantations of the Yangtze River Delta Region

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Unfortunately quality of this manuscript is not enough for publishing at this journal.

Introduction is very weak.

There is no any novelty.

Result finding is poor.

There are so much English grammatical problems.

I have to reject it.

Author Response

Thanks for the useful comments. We have revised the paper according to the suggestions of other reviewers, especially the introduction and results. We have revised grammatical errors sentence structure.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article, “Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region” describes and compares changes in soil water content following rainfall events and their relationships with environmental factors. This is important research to understand the impact of artificial forests. The article is well written, well-formatted, but lacks in-depth analysis relating the soil – moisture content to environmental factors.  

The article only presents data. The article vaguely describes that soil moisture content relates to drought in one sentence in the discussion. They should establish this further using data and literature to make this article impactful.  

The article should include how this study will contribute to the hydrology of artificial forests. The authors should use an hour-glass approach to describe the big picture, narrow it down to the details (already present in the paper), and then connect back to the big picture. Between paragraphs 2 and 3 (Line 53 and 54), the authors should describe the significance of soil moisture. What do high and low soil moisture levels indicate? How do they vary with plant and soil type? Most importantly, “how does the soil moisture affect the hydrological cycle and environment?”  

The authors should describe quality control measures adopted in data collection.

The authors should also include justification for using statistical test ANOVA.

Citations are in APA format. Please refer to the MDPI Water format for citations.

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region” (ID: water-1138943). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript according to each comment referred by the reviewers. The revised portions were highlighted in blue and red in the marked-revised manuscript.

1. The article is well written, well-formatted, but lacks in-depth analysis relating the soil – moisture content to environmental factors.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have revised it in the original manuscript.

The relationship between soil moisture content and environmental factors was deeply analyzed. Please see lines 159-169.

2. The article only presents data. The article vaguely describes that soil moisture content relates to drought in one sentence in the discussion. They should establish this further using data and literature to make this article impactful.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We have added a discussion of the relationship between drought and soil moisture content to the original manuscript. Please see lines 1101-1106.

3. The article should include how this study will contribute to the hydrology of artificial forests.

Response: Thanks for your suggestions. In the preface of the original manuscript, we added the role of this study in promoting plantation hydrology. Please see lines501-511.

4. The authors should use an hour-glass approach to describe the big picture, narrow it down to the details (already present in the paper), and then connect back to the big picture.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We redescribed it in the original manuscript. Please see lines 908-911.

5. Between paragraphs 2 and 3 (Line 53 and 54), the authors should describe the significance of soil moisture. What do high and low soil moisture levels indicate? How do they vary with plant and soil type? Most importantly, “how does the soil moisture affect the hydrological cycle and environment?”

Response: Thanks for your suggestions. The level of soil water content reflects the local hydrological characteristics, and the water content of regions with different vegetation cover types is also greatly different. The higher soil water content indicates that the local rainfall is more or the soil water retention ability is stronger (Getie et al. 2020); otherwise, the soil water content is lower, and the soil erosion is reduced due to the plant cover (Rodrigo-Comino et al.). Soil moisture is an important link of hydrological cycle and the link between each link of hydrological cycle. Soil moisture affecting the vegetation growth, vegetation coverage and good reflect the environmental quality, at the same time the soil moisture can be directly reaction amount of underground runoff, good vegetation growth and atmospheric enough transpiration can effectively replenish water, to provide adequate rainfall condition, can complement timely rainfall and surface runoff and soil moisture, and then form a complete process of hydrologic cycle (Constantinidou et al.).

We have added this to the introduction. Please see lines 159-169.

References

Constantinidou, K., Hadjinicolaou, P., Zittis, G., Lelieveld, J.J.E.S. and Environment Performance of Land Surface Schemes in the WRF Model for Climate Simulations over the MENA-CORDEX Domain. 1-19.

Getie, M.A., Legesse, S.A., Mekonnen, M., Aschalew, A.J.E.S. and Environment (2020) Soil Properties and Crop Productivity Strategies as a Potential Climate Variability Adaptation Options in Adefwuha Watershed, Ethiopia.  4(2), 359-368.

Rodrigo-Comino, J., Terol, E., Mora, G., Giménez-Morera, A., Systems, A.C.J.E. and Environment Vicia sativa Roth . Can Reduce Soil and Water Losses in Recently Planted Vineyards ( Vitis vinifera L.). 1-16.

6. The authors should describe quality control measures adopted in data collection.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We cite relevant references to describe. Please see lines 735.

7. The authors should also include justification for using statistical test ANOVA.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. Test ANOVA is a statistical method that can show whether the mean between multiple groups of samples is significant, and this method well illustrates our research results.

8. Citations are in APA format. Please refer to the MDPI Water format for citations.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have revised the format of the citation. Please see the changed marked manuscript.

We have tried our best to improve the manuscript and have changed some descriptions. These descriptions will not alter the content and framework of the paper. We are very appreciated for Editors/Reviewers’ work, and we sincerely hope that these revisions will meet requirements. Once again, thank you very much for your work and comments.

Yours sincerely,

Jinchi Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I appreciate the Editor to give me a chance to review an interesting and valuable paper. I found some merits in the both methodology and results. In my opinion, this paper has a good potential to be published in the journal. However, I have also some concerns on the different parts of the manuscript. If the author(s) address carefully to the comments, I’ll recommend publication of the manuscript in the journal:

• Add some of the most important quantitative results to the Abstract.
• Add/Replace the name of the study area to the Keywords.
• In the last paragraph of the Introduction, the authors should clearly mention the weakness point of former works (identification of the gaps) and describe the novelties of the current investigation to justify us the paper deserves to be published in this journal.
• Lines 42- 53, cite these recent useful papers on the different aspects of the importance of soil moisture to improve the literature and to show the importance of your work:

Performance of Land Surface Schemes in the WRF Model for Climate Simulations over the MENA-CORDEX Domain

Vicia sativa Roth. Can Reduce Soil and Water Losses in Recently Planted Vineyards (Vitis vinifera L.)

Soil Properties and Crop Productivity Strategies as a Potential Climate Variability Adaptation Options in Adefwuha Watershed, Ethiopia

• Discuss the most important reasons for the variations of the environmental variables following different rainfall intensities.
• It is necessary to explain the sources of error in this study to consider them in next investigations.
• How can extend the results in other regions with similar/different soil moisture conditions?

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region” (ID: water-1138943). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript according to each comment referred by the reviewers. The revised portions were highlighted in blue and red in the marked-revised manuscript.

Reviewer #3:

1. Add some of the most important quantitative results to the Abstract.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We revised the abstract and added quantitative results to the abstract.

2. Add/Replace the name of the study area to the Keywords.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We have added the study area to the keyword as you suggested.

3. In the last paragraph of the Introduction, the authors should clearly mention the weakness point of former works (identification of the gaps) and describe the novelties of the current investigation to justify us the paper deserves to be published in this journal.

Response: Although a plethora of studies have explored the relationships between rainfall and soil moisture, these studies typically focused only on changes in soil moisture after the beginning of rainfall. However, it is still not clear how the soil water content is altered over time following different rainfall intensities, and what the key factors are that determine these changes. According to the results of the Ninth National Forest Resources Inventory, the area of artificial forest in China has reached 79,542,800 hm2, accounting for 32.94% (almost a third) of the total forested area in China [43]. Plantations play a critical role in the greening of the land and the improvement of ecosystems. An in-depth study of hydrology can have a profound impact on the sustainable development of plantations, encompassing their construction and the regulation of water distribution. Based on the water distribution characteristics of the main afforested tree species in the middle and lower extents of the Yangtze River, this paper employed long-term positioning monitoring equipment to continuously monitor the study area. This strategy provided more coherent and sufficient monitoring data, while establishing a solid foundation for the future study of plantation hydrology.

We have added this part to the original manuscript to demonstrate the merits and novelty of this paper. Please see lines 501-511

4. Lines 42- 53, cite these recent useful papers on the different aspects of the importance of soil moisture to improve the literature and to show the importance of your work:

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. As you suggested, we have cited these latest papers to illustrate the importance of soil moisture. Please see lines 159-169.

5. Discuss the most important reasons for the variations of the environmental variables following different rainfall intensities.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We have explained the reasons for the changes of environmental variables after different rainfall intensities in the discussion section. Please see lines 1526-1531.

6. It is necessary to explain the sources of error in this study to consider them in next investigations.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have described the shortcomings of this paper and will pay attention to them in the next research. Please see lines 1554-1557.

7. How can extend the results in other regions with similar/different soil moisture conditions?

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. In other areas with similar or different soil moisture conditions, we need to strengthen the dynamic monitoring of soil moisture, especially before and after rainfall events. In order to obtain the law of water dynamic change, and then for the cultivation of artificial forest or the protection of natural forest to make scientific planning and guidance. We have supplemented this part in the conclusion. Please see lines 1570-1635.

We have tried our best to improve the manuscript and have changed some descriptions. These descriptions will not alter the content and framework of the paper. We are very appreciated for Editors/Reviewers’ work, and we sincerely hope that these revisions will meet requirements. Once again, thank you very much for your work and comments.

Yours sincerely,

Jinchi Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Ms. Ref. No.: water-1138943

Title: Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region

Journal: Water

General Comments

The authors have done a good amount of work to justify the estimation of soil water and its relationship with different environmental factors following to different rainfall events. However, there are some points described below that has to be considered before publication.

I believe that after duly addressing the comments authors can improve the quality of manuscript substantially to make it more insightful.

I feel there are some interesting aspects haven’t been fully explored in the current MS.

In particular, the authors present results in form of the seasonal soil moisture variations, however, it would be interesting to plot the corresponding CV for each mean soil moisture interval. This analysis method may describe some interesting patterns. In terms of spatial variation, the relation between CV and soil moisture often shows a hysteresis pattern (Ivanov et al., 2008). It will be interesting to see whether the hysteresis is also observed in this study and how each factors can affect the pattern of hysteresis, and how that might differ between the different rainfall events. The authors could also use coefficient of variation and standard deviation and relative difference as used in a very recent study by Srivastava et al., 2021 and Brocca et al., (2012). Perhaps, the authors could also plot the frequency distribution of CV and mean temporal soil moisture to display the seasonal variations for each factor? Authors may like to find studies in line of their statements to add the scientific weight in their observations. A good review of soil moisture variability can be found in Srivastava et al. (2021), Brocca et al. (2012) and Chen et al. (2014). Authors may like to supplement first and second paragraphs from the listed studies as well as other relevant studies.

Srivastava, A., Saco, P. M., Rodriguez, J. F., Kumari, N., Chun, K. P., & Yetemen, O. (2021). The role of landscape morphology on soil moisture variability in semi‐arid ecosystems. Hydrological Processes, 35(1), e13990.

Chen, M., Willgoose, G. R., & Saco, P. M. (2014). Spatial prediction of temporal soil moisture dynamics using HYDRUS‐1D. Hydrological processes, 28(2), 171-185.

Brocca, L., Tullo, T., Melone, F., Moramarco, T., & Morbidelli, R. (2012). Catchment scale soil moisture spatial–temporal variability. Journal of hydrology, 422, 63-75.

Ivanov, V.Y., Fatichi, S., Jenerette, G.D., Espeleta, J.F., Troch, P.A., Huxman, T.E., 2010. Hysteresis of soil moisture spatial heterogeneity and the “homogenizing” effect of vegetation. Water  Resour. Res. 46, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008611

Specific comments

There are no key results described in the abstract section.

Many places in the manuscript where spacing between the words and brackets are not given. References are not well arranged in the references section at many places according the journal format.

There is a need to clearly state the objective(s) of the study towards the end of the introduction.

Check for the grammar, many of the sentences are not making good sense

Discussion and Conclusion sections can be more conscientious with objective base.

I suggest authors to include the study area of the region utilized with elevation map.

Line 1: In the title I suggest authors to use Comparison of instead of “Comparative the”

 In the manuscript the ACR is not abbreviated and especially at its first usage

Line 34-35 Shorten the keyword

Line 44: soil-vegetation-atmosphere

Line 45: give the spacing between bracket and word

Line 47: give the spacing

Line 142: expand HOBO

Line 169-170: Insert a citation for the usage of CV and describe how the Duncan test was applied and selection of meteorological was done

Line 297-300: Please elaborate this statement clearly what the authors mean by direct and indirect impacts it needs to discussed with proper justification

Line 306: Omit the extra spacing

Not limited to this but please correct the references at all places

Line 408: Reference incorrectly arranged

Line 500: References is not well arranged in the journal format

Line 502: Similar problem here in this reference

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region” (ID: water-1138943). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript according to each comment referred by the reviewers. The revised portions were highlighted in blue and red in the marked-revised manuscript.

Reviewer #4:

1. In particular, the authors present results in form of the seasonal soil moisture variations, however, it would be interesting to plot the corresponding CV for each mean soil moisture interval. This analysis method may describe some interesting patterns. In terms of spatial variation, the relation between CV and soil moisture often shows a hysteresis pattern (Ivanov et al., 2008). It will be interesting to see whether the hysteresis is also observed in this study and how each factors can affect the pattern of hysteresis, and how that might differ between the different rainfall events. The authors could also use coefficient of variation and standard deviation and relative difference as used in a very recent study by Srivastava et al., 2021 and Brocca et al., (2012). Perhaps, the authors could also plot the frequency distribution of CV and mean temporal soil moisture to display the seasonal variations for each factor? Authors may like to find studies in line of their statements to add the scientific weight in their observations. A good review of soil moisture variability can be found in Srivastava et al. (2021), Brocca et al. (2012) and Chen et al. (2014). Authors may like to supplement first and second paragraphs from the listed studies as well as other relevant studies.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We carefully studied the four citations you provided and combined them with our research. We found that there was no good relationship between soil average water content and CV. You can find it in S3 in the SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL section. There is a certain regularity between rainfall and CV. We have added relevant content in the discussion section. Please see lines 1387-1390.

2. There are no key results described in the abstract section.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We describe the key results in the abstract section.

3. Many places in the manuscript where spacing between the words and brackets are not given. References are not well arranged in the references section at many places according the journal format.

Response: We went through the manuscript and adjusted the spacing between words and parentheses. And the format of the references is modified.

4. There is a need to clearly state the objective(s) of the study towards the end of the introduction.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We revised the manuscript and defined the objectives of the research at the end of the introduction. Please see lines 497-511.

5. Check for the grammar, many of the sentences are not making good sense.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We have revised grammatical errors sentence structure, particularly in the abstract and introduction sections.

6. Discussion and Conclusion sections can be more conscientious with objective base.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We also sorted out the discussion and conclusion, making the article more serious and objective.

7. I suggest authors to include the study area of the region utilized with elevation map.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have added the location map and elevation map of the study area into the paper according to your suggestion. Please see Figure 1.

8. Line 1: In the title I suggest authors to use Comparison of instead of “Comparative the”

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We have changed it as you suggested.

9. In the manuscript the ACR is not abbreviated and especially at its first usage.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have abbreviated it according to your suggestion and changed it in the full paper.

10. Line 34-35 Shorten the keyword.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We've shortened the keywords.

11. Line 44: soil-vegetation-atmosphere

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We changed "soil-vegetation-atmosphere" to "hydrological". Please see lines 44.

12. Line 45: give the spacing between bracket and word.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have corrected this error, as well as other similar errors throughout the paper.

13. Line 47: give the spacing.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have corrected this error, as well as other similar errors throughout the paper.

14. Line 142: expand HOBO.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We made a change at line 751.

15. Line 169-170: Insert a citation for the usage of CV and describe how the Duncan test was applied and selection of meteorological was done

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We re-insert the citation to describe the choice of the Duncan test and meteorological indicators.

16. Line 297-300: Please elaborate this statement clearly what the authors mean by direct and indirect impacts it needs to discussed with proper justification

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. The higher rainfall in summer and autumn is the direct reason for the increase of soil moisture content, while the lower temperature in winter and spring leads to the decrease of rainfall with the decrease of evaporation, which is the indirect reason for the low soil moisture content. Please see lines 1129-1132.

17. Line 306: Omit the extra spacing. Not limited to this but please correct the references at all places

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We removed the extra spacing and checked and revised the paper.

11. Line 408: Reference incorrectly arranged. Line 500: References is not well arranged in the journal format. Similar problem here in this reference.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We have modified the format of the reference, please check the original manuscript.

We have tried our best to improve the manuscript and have changed some descriptions. These descriptions will not alter the content and framework of the paper. We are very appreciated for Editors/Reviewers’ work, and we sincerely hope that these revisions will meet requirements. Once again, thank you very much for your work and comments.

Yours sincerely,

Jinchi Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Literature Review part still needs improvement.

Provide a graphical abstract for better understanding.

Provide your result at least two different figures. This is very essential for this manuscript. This manuscript needs to be more visual.

Author Response

尊敬的编辑和审稿人，

非常感谢您的来信和审稿人对我们题为“长江三角洲不同亚热带人工林降雨后土壤水分含量变化的比较”（ID：water-1138943）的评论。这些评论都是有价值的，并且对于修订和改进我们的论文非常有帮助。我们根据审稿人提交的每条评论对稿件进行了仔细的修改。修订后的部分在标记的修订稿中以蓝色和红色突出显示。

评论者1：

1. 文献综述部分仍需改进。

回应：感谢您的有用评论。我们已经修订了本文的“文献综述”部分。希望您对此感到满意。

2. 提供图形摘要以更好地理解。提供结果至少两个不同的数字。这对于此手稿非常重要。该手稿需要更具视觉感。

回应：感谢您的正面评价。我们已按照您的建议添加了图形摘要。请参阅补充材料S 4。

我们已尽力改进手稿，并更改了一些说明。这些描述不会改变本文的内容和框架。我们非常感谢编辑/审阅者的工作，我们衷心希望这些修订能够满足要求。再次感谢您的工作和评论。

此致，

张金池

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The title should be Comparison of changes..................... (of is missing)

The introduction is much improved. 

Line 205 - Remove non-English script

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region” (ID: water-1138943). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript according to each comment referred by the reviewers. The revised portions were highlighted in blue and red in the marked-revised manuscript.

Reviewer #2:

1. The title should be Comparison of changes..................... (of is missing)

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have corrected the title.

2. The introduction is much improved.

Response: Thank you for your previous advice. It is with your help that we can revise the manuscript better.

3. Line 205 - Remove non-English script

Response: Thanks for your suggestions. We have removed non-English script. Please see lines246.

We have tried our best to improve the manuscript and have changed some descriptions. These descriptions will not alter the content and framework of the paper. We are very appreciated for Editors/Reviewers’ work, and we sincerely hope that these revisions will meet requirements. Once again, thank you very much for your work and comments.

Yours sincerely,

Jinchi Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

I want to thank the authors for addressing previous comments and for their comprehensive replies. I found all replies satisfactory and the changes made to the manuscript significantly improve the quality of the paper Overall, I think the revised manuscript is almost ready for acceptance.

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparative the changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of Yangtze River Delta region” (ID: water-1138943). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript according to each comment referred by the reviewers. The revised portions were highlighted in blue and red in the marked-revised manuscript.

Reviewer #4:

1. I want to thank the authors for addressing previous comments and for their comprehensive replies. I found all replies satisfactory and the changes made to the manuscript significantly improve the quality of the paper Overall, I think the revised manuscript is almost ready for acceptance.

Response: Thank you for your previous suggestions, which enabled us to improve the quality of the manuscript so quickly. I hope the manuscript will be accepted.

We have tried our best to improve the manuscript and have changed some descriptions. These descriptions will not alter the content and framework of the paper. We are very appreciated for Editors/Reviewers’ work, and we sincerely hope that these revisions will meet requirements. Once again, thank you very much for your work and comments.

Yours sincerely,

Jinchi Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

The equations used need number.

Provide limitation of study in Conclusion.

Follow journal format, for ex. In Fig 2. Title must be below of figure. Put all figures and table inside of text.

English language has basic problems, please use a native speaker for polish English writing.

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

Thank you very much for your letter and the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparison of changes in soil moisture content following rainfall in different subtropical plantations of the Yangtze River Delta region” (ID: water-1138943). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We have carefully revised the manuscript according to each comment referred by the reviewers. The revised portions were highlighted in green, red and blue in the marked-revised manuscript.

Reviewer #1:

1. The equations used need number.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. We have numbered the equations used in this paper. Please see lines 273 and 290.

2. Provide limitation of study in Conclusion.

Response: Thank you for the positive comments. We provided the limitations of this study in the conclusion. Please see lines 836-841.

3. Follow journal format, for ex. In Fig 2. Title must be below of figure. Put all figures and table inside of text.

Response: Thanks for the useful comments. In accordance with the requirements of the journal, we put the title below of figure, and put all figures and table inside of text.

4. English language has basic problems, please use a native speaker for polish English writing.

Response: Thank you for your previous advice. We have corrected the English writing in the article. To the best of our ability, we revised the full text in publish English writing.

We have tried our best to improve the manuscript and have changed some descriptions. These descriptions will not alter the content and framework of the paper. We are very appreciated for Editors/Reviewers’ work, and we sincerely hope that these revisions will meet requirements. Once again, thank you very much for your work and comments.

Yours sincerely,

Jinchi Zhang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx