Assessment of Biological and Environmental Factors Influence on Fire Hazard in Pine Forests: A Case Study in Central Forest-Steppe of the East European Plain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

The subject of the paper is a current and very important topic since it is a contribution to the study of forest fires. In my opinion, the subject fits the scope of the Land journal.

The aim of the study is the determination of the key factors influencing the flammability in forests for preventive reduction of the occurrence of fires.

Forest stand characteristics (data from sample plots) and values of burning indexes (areas covered by forest fires) were analyzed. Study sites were selected in similar types of forests, types of forest growth conditions and age groups.

The authors show that forest growth conditions is an important indicator that can be used in determining the fire hazard class.

  Remarks:

- The paper is not well written. English needs to be improved (for example, lines 46, 55, 65, 73, 350-354,…).

- Abstract is too brief and does not mention the forest fires analyzed or the study methodology.

- The written text has many missing references (Error! Reference source not found).

- The "2. Materials and Methods" section is not well organized. For example, the justification for the selection of sample plots only appears in section “3. Results” (lines 268-271).

Author Response

Dear reviewer, all your comments have been taken into account. Corrections are highlighted in green. 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Huge forest areas are annually damaged by fires. Prevention and rapid extinguishing of wildfires is one of the main tasks of forestry in many countries. However, despite numerous studies, additional studies are still needed to clarify regional features. From this point of view, this paper is relevant, as it draws attention to an important problem.

 The conducted scientific research has a scientific novelty. The key forestry factors influencing the fire hazard situation in pine stands are identified, these are the following: the presence and amount of combustible materials, the state of the stand, as well as the age structure of the plantation.

The results obtained are of practical importance for forest management in Russia.

 In the introduction, the relevance of the study is well substantiated. The state of the problem is described briefly, but quite informative. The research aim is formulated clearly and clearly. It is also desirable to describe here the stages of work and the methodological basis. A characterization of the research concept here would be very desirable.

 The research methodology is described in detail. It is unclear what forest typology the authors use. In the paper, the authors indicate the forest typology of Pogrebnyak (Ecological–silvicultural classification), and the definition of the forest type is given on the basis of the forest typology of Sukachev (Phytocoenotic forest typology). These are completely different approaches to ecological forest classification. The forest type in these approaches has a different scope and meaning.

 The research results are perfectly illustrated with 8 tables and 5 figures. The results are presented clearly and clearly.

 Conclusions follow from the results and are reasonable.  The paper will be of interest to a wide range of readers whose scientific interests are related to forestry and forest ecological security. Despite the fact that English is not my native language, I read the paper with interest and had no difficulties in understanding.

Conclusion 3. The frequency of fires and the values of the fire index reach high values in dry tapas of forest conditions (may be phrased as follows: habitat types?), because characterized by the presence of lichens in the ground cover.

In the list of references, the authors give different formats for DOIs. This needs to be corrected. In addition, authors often list DOIs with errors. This also needs to be corrected.

For example: Ivanova, N.S.; Zolotova, E.S. Development of forest typology in Russia. Int. J. Bioresour. Stress Manage. 2014, 5, 298–303. doi:10.5958/0976-4038.2014. (correct link: https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-4038.2014.00572.7 ).

I can also recommend a later publication by this author:

Ivanova, N.; Fomin, V.; Kusbach, A. Experience of Forest Ecological Classification in Assessment of Vegetation Dynamics. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063384

Author Response

Dear reviewer!

The authors of the article express their deep gratitude to you for your comments on the text of our article. These comments helped to improve the presentation of our research results significantly. Thank you.

 

Responses to reviewer comments.

 

Point 1:

Response 1: Thank you for your comment. The stages of our research have been added to the article.

 

Point 2: The frequency of fires and the values of the fire index reach high values in dry tapas of forest conditions (may be phrased as follows: habitat types?), because characterized by the presence of lichens in the ground cover.

Response 2: In our opinion, it is advisable to use these forest typologies, further comparing them and drawing conclusions. We consider it appropriate to use 3 types of growth conditions in the conclusion, since throughout the article we use a single structure of terms.

 

Point 3: In the list of references, the authors give different formats for DOIs. This needs to be corrected. In addition, authors often list DOIs with errors. This also needs to be corrected.

Response 3: Errors in the bibliography with DOI have been corrected.

 

Point 4: I can also recommend a later publication by this author: Ivanova, N.; Fomin, V.; Kusbach, A. Experience of Forest Ecological Classification in Assessment of Vegetation Dynamics. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063384

Response 4: We have reviewed this publication and added it to the references. Thanks for the article recommendation.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

The submitted manusctipt titled „Assessment of the influence of biological and environmental factors on fire hazard in Pine Forests of the Central Forest Steppe on the East European Plain” reffering to very important topic of fire consequences, contains interesting results. However, I have found some imperfections (which, in my opinion) should be improved before an eventual publication. Please, find them below:

Major issues:

1. In my opinion the chapter Introduction should be complete. The background of investigations (containing inter aloia the brief review of current state of knowledge) and justification of choice of scientific problem should be enlarged. At the end the specific goals should be listed.

2. The chapter „Material and methods” should be divided into following subchapters:

 The study sites

 Field studies

 Data analyses

3. The desription of results is very extensive. I suggest to divide this chapter into subchapters. 

4. In my opinion the chapter Discussion should be enlarged with other sources of literature of subject. Please look into below-listed publications. Perhaps some of them would be suitable:

 Melissa Savage and Joy Nystrom Mast. How resilient are southwestern ponderosa pine forests after crown fires?. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 35(4): 967-977. https://doi.org/10.1139/x05-028

 Thomas T. Veblen,Thomas Kitzberger,Joseph Donnegan 2000. CLIMATIC AND HUMAN INFLUENCES ON FIRE REGIMES IN PONDEROSA PINE FORESTS IN THE COLORADO FRONT RANGE. Ecological Applications 10(4): 1178-1195.

 Hanberry et al. 2020. Reviewing Fire, Climate, Deer, and Foundation Species as Drivers of Historically Open Oak and Pine Forests and Transition to Closed Forests. Front. For. Glob. Change, Sec. Fire and Forests https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00056

 Tryterud E. 2003. Forest fire history in Norway: from fire-disturbed pine forests to fire-free spruce forests. Ecography 26(2), 161-170. 

 

 

Minor issues:

1. In decimal numerical values please, use point instead of coma.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer!

The authors of the article express their deep gratitude to you for your comments on the text of our article. These comments helped to improve the presentation of our research results significantly. Thank you.

 

 

Responses to reviewer comments.

 

The English language throughout the article has been corrected.

 

Point 1: In my opinion the chapter Introduction should be complete. The background of investigations (containing inter aloia the brief review of current state of knowledge) and justification of choice of scientific problem should be enlarged. At the end the specific goals should be listed.

Response 1: Section "Introduction" added. Thank you for your comment.

 

Point 2: The chapter „Material and methods” should be divided into following subchapters: The study sites; Field studies; Data analyses.

Response 2: The chapter „Materials and methods” is divided into the following subsections: Objects of study, Field studies, Methods of fire assessment and statistical analysis. Thank you for your comment.

 

Point 3: The desription of results is very extensive. I suggest to divide this chapter into subchapters.

Response 3: Divided the chapter "Research results". Thank you for your comment.

 

Point 4: In my opinion the chapter Discussion should be enlarged with other sources of literature of subject. Please look into below-listed publications.

Response 4: Thanks for the suggested sources of literature, we used some in the chapter "Introduction".

 

Point 5: In decimal numerical values please, use point instead of coma.

Response 5: Thank you for your comment. Fixed. All commas have been replaced with dots.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

After revision, the English, organization and overall quality of the manuscript improved significantly.
Thank you very much.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

In my opinion the submitted manuscript has received the sufficient corrections. Therefore, I do not have any further remarks.