Effect of Soil Agricultural Use on Particle-Size Distribution in Young Glacial Landscape Slopes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General I found some significant impacts in the manuscript which could contribute to science, however, authors should consider my comments below for revision.

-Abstract is too general. Authors should state the main results/finding, not just general conclusion.

-Conclusion is not clear and too long. I suggest authors shorthen, combine them, and make the main findings only.

Figure 3,4: Please revise it. The current figures are not clear and at high resolution.

Others point: P5L183: SL – loamy sand?--> is it correct?

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please find attached pdf file with the response to Your comments.  

Regards

The authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor,

The manuscript titled: Effect of soil agricultural use on particle-size distribution in young glacial landscape slopes has been reviewed. I understand that the authors put in a great deal of work to do this research, and for that, I highly commend them. Overall, the manuscript is well written, and I think the readers of Agriculture Journal will find it helpful in improving their general knowledge on how agricultural use can affect soil physical properties. However, there are few concerns I would like for the authors to address before accepting this manuscript for publication.

First, I really could not find the novelty of this study after reading the paper multiple times. What problem did the study seek to solve, or what question did it seek to answer? Most of the main findings of this study are common knowledge. For example, it is well known that soil clay and silt content will increase from upper to lower slope because of erosion and sedimentation. So why conduct a study just to confirm that? The study also found that clay and silt content of parent materials was lower compared to the humus horizon. This is also known because the parent materials are still undergoing the process of soil formation and have not fully undergone weathering.  So, I want the authors to really highlight the novelty of the study both in the introduction section and also in the conclusion, so that readers can really grasp the key message the authors want to convey in this study.

Second, the conclusion section is supposed to summarize the purpose and highlights the key findings of the study, and what they mean. However, the conclusion here is too long and mostly repeats the finding of the study. Please make it concise and highlight the take-home message you want us to get from this study.

Other issues

 Line 29: did you mean Glacial landforms may form…..?

Lines 82: replace “carried” with “conducted” or “carried out”

Lines 83 – 87: Please provide the GPS coordinate as well as the slope and elevation for each location

Line 91: what do you mean by “flat”? what is the percent slope or gradient? Is it zero percent slope? Is it 1% slope? Please specify.

Line 107: what is the percent slope on the upper slope? Lower slope? And depression?

Line 112: How were the samples crushed? Did you use a soil grander (if so, what type) or did you use mortar and pestle?  Please specify. Also, replace “was” after samples with “were”.

Line 113: when you wrote “skeleton fraction” did you mean “coarse fraction”? if so, what is the particle size of the fraction?

Line 114 – 115: What standard soil analysis? Provide reference of the method you used.

Line 195 – 196: There is no point using “Statistically” and “significantly” concurrently. If two things are “statistically different” they are also “significantly different”. So, choose one and delete the other, and do that throughout the manuscript.

Line 232: first sentence beginning with “Characteristic” is  confusing. Please rewrite it for clarity.

Line 336: what do you mean by “less various values”?

Line 389: Did you mean “ice-dammed lakes”

Figure 3. The fond size is small and difficult to read, especially on the X-axis. Please improve the figure quality. Also, what are you measuring on the axis? What’s on the y-axis? What’s on the X-axis? Please define each acronym on the X-axis in the figure description. (What are vcos, cos,ms fs, vfs, cosi fsi, and c)? If the X-axis is showing the same measurement for both figure A and B, then the acronyms should only be on Fig. B

Tables 1, 4, 5, 6, 7: in parenthesis, put the gradient or % slope after each slope position.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please find attached pdf file with response to Your comments. 

Regards

The authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf