Impact of Thinning and Contour-Felled Logs on Overland Flow, Soil Erosion, and Litter Erosion in a Monoculture Japanese Cypress Forest Plantation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have annotated some suggestions/ corrections (comments) in the attached file. The MS needs a major revision. 
Please revise the MS as per suggestions and respond to individual comments in a separate file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is interesting to explore the impact of thinning and contour-felled logs on overland flow, soil and litter erosion in a Japanese cypress forest plantation. The manuscript is well organized and written.

Question,

 Due to the spatial heterogeneity, how to guarantee the uniformity of traps to collect samples ?

L125, 0.6 g cm-3 is small. Which soil layer is measured?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

 The manuscript ‘Impact of thinning and contour-felled logs on overland flow, soil and litter erosion in a monoculture Japanese cypress forest plantation’ examined the impact of thinning and felling logs on overland flow, soil and litter erosion in a Japanese cypress forest plantation. The title and abstract of this manuscript reflect its content. The introduction presents the purpose of the research investigation and is supported by the pertinent literature. However, the introduction can be improved by describing the novelty of this research. In addition, please explain the process of thinning and how plants were selected to remove. It will give more insight into this process.

The study site can explain by describing rainfall patterns throughout the years. The material and method, experimental results, analysis, and discussion provided appropriate information for repeating this research. Figures 5, 6, and 8 are blurred. Please improve them. The evidence supports the conclusion and addresses the main question posed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All the suggestions have been incorporated