The Pedogenesis of Soil Derived from Carbonate Rocks along a Climosequence in a Subtropical Mountain, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study contains original data from carbonate rocks in a subtropical mountain, southwest China. The main aim of this research was to evaluate how the climate control carbonate rocks weathering and pedogenesis across a steep environmental gradient in a subtropical mountain area. However, the current situation requires a major revision because of issues needed to be addressed and quite a number of details.
The major issue is that difficult to understand which issue is most important and new findings in this study. This submission had not discussed to compare with the soils with other environmental condition such as parent rocks, climate, topography. If the target is study in subtropical climate, should be summarize and discuss to compare with the climo-topo-sequence under another climate conditions.
And, more details of geological information are needed. Lower elevation sites (S1 to S4) and higher elevation sites (S5 to S8) had different topology, might be there geological features are different (different rock hardness, consist of primary mineral…). Dose this study area need to consider the impact of loess?
“forests” is international journal. Please explain the detail of Chinese domestic classification system for soil, climate, geology, etc. And compare to global systems, for improve your manuscript.
Details
Line 86, Why study in southwestern China? Did not state above section.
Line 104-105, Please show this geographical boundary to Fig. 1.
Line 106, northern and middle part of subtropical climate zone? Are these classification in local classification system? Please explain it.
Line 130, Typo, sweet Potatocone -> sweet Potato
Table.1, Insert column for geological information. (line 166-171)
Line 145, “slope” -> slope gradient? Which kind of slope?
Line 159, “In addition, the soil…the study site” is overlapped above section.
Line 166-171, Shown also in Table 1.
Fig.2, Typo, “Distabce(m)” -> Distance(m)
Line 188, Which is correct “soil organic matter” or “soil organic carbon”? Please clarify.
Line 241, “in all of the pedon…”, although some pedon had not Bt horizon.
Line 245, “Bw1” may be “AB” horizon of S4 pedon. Please clarify.
Line 252, “significantly”; Please clarify using statistical analysis. Are these overlying horizons meet argillic property or argic horizon in ST and WRB?
Line 258, I can not see the tendency of decrease of bulk density with elevation. Need more detail explanation.
Line 264, Not generally. I think that has no trend with depth.
Line 269, Why these base saturations did not determine? Over saturated in pH7 solution?
Line 294-295, Unclear the tendency decrease.
Line 339, “Fig.3” had not include this content in this sentence. Another figure?
Fig. 4, No title for each axis. “Pedon x” is correct to “Sx (S1,S2..)”.
Line 353-354, Difficult to understand.
Line 362, Which wave length (peak) correspond? Not easy to compare this.
Line 365, S7 and S8 had remain weak peak after heating, therefore, “disappeared” is not correct.
Table 5, No explain in the result section.
Line 388-390, “Distinctly” How many percent higher than overlying horizon? Is this criterion same as ST and WRB? S3, S4 and S7 have no L.C. of carbonate rocks, although these soils derived from carbonate rocks. Why? Had these soils not derived from carbonate rocks? Or, hidden for other high priority feature? Many readers do not well know the Chinese soil classification system. Please explain the detail of classification.
Line 420, “21.08” -> “30.52”
Line 429, Do you have any evidence of exist of CaCO3 in these pedon?
Line 436, I think that these clay situation same as above pH situation, too.
Line 455-456, Over-discussion. This result was leaded from only 1 pedon. Please refer other evidences.
Fig. 6, average and variance? Please state the detail in the figure or title.
Line 533, Please state the distribution of these typical yellow soils in China. Are these soils distribute under colder climate?
Line 544, Please explain the reason why this vegetation lead acidification or lacking of L.C. of carbonate rocks.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: This study contains original data from carbonate rocks in a subtropical mountain, southwest China. The main aim of this research was to evaluate how the climate control carbonate rocks weathering and pedogenesis across a steep environmental gradient in a subtropical mountain area. However, the current situation requires a major revision because of issues needed to be addressed and quite a number of details.
The major issue is that difficult to understand which issue is most important and new findings in this study. This submission had not discussed to compare with the soils with other environmental condition such as parent rocks, climate, topography. If the target is study in subtropical climate, should be summarize and discuss to compare with the climo-topo-sequence under another climate conditions.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments. According to your comments, we revised. We hope the revised manuscript would be improved than that of previous version. In the “4. Discussion” section, we added the comparation of different parent rocks, climate, topography in other studies (Rasmussen et al., 2010; Deressa et al., 2018; Yan et al., 2011; Qiu, 2008; Liu et al., 2009; Peng et al., 2014). And we summarized 3 points of most important and new findings in this study.
- The effects of temperature on the soil mineral transformation were found to gradually weaken with increasing elevation;
- The changes which occurred from forest to cultivated land could potentially accelerate the formation of argic horizons;
- The soil in the humid subtropical areas were found to gradually evolve from Cambosols to Argosols with the increasing elevation.
References:
- Rasmussen, C.; Dahlgren, R.A.; Southard, R.J. Basalt weathering and pedogenesis across an environmental gradient in the southern Cascade Range, California, USA. Geoderma 2010, 154, 473-485.
- Deressa, A.; Yli-Halla, M.; Mohamed, M.; Wogi, L. Soil classification of humid Western Ethiopia: A transect study along a toposequence in Didessa watershed. Catena 2018, 163, 184-195.
- Yan, N.; Bai, Z.; Xu, W.; Li, Y. Land use effect on soil aggregates in the karst hilly areas —A case study in Qianjiang Chongqing China. Carsologica Sinica 2011, 30, 72-77.
- Qiu, H. Comparative research of soil micromorphological characters on typical crop land and artificial ecological-forest eastern Guanzhong areas, Shaanxi province. Master Type, Shaanxi Normal University, 2008.
- Liu, X.; Zhang, G.; Heathman, G.C.; Wang, Y.; Huang, C. Fractal features of soil particle-size distribution as affected by plant communities in the forested region of Mountain Yimeng, China. Geoderma 2009, 154, 123-130.
- Peng, G.; Xiang, N.; Lv, S.; Zhang, G. Fractal characterization of soil particle-size distribution under different land-use patterns in the Yellow River Delta Wetland in China. J Soil Sediment 2014, 14, 1116-1122.
Point 2: And, more details of geological information are needed. Lower elevation sites (S1 to S4) and higher elevation sites (S5 to S8) had different topology, might be there geological features are different (different rock hardness, consist of primary mineral…). Dose this study area need to consider the impact of loess?
Response 2: Thank you very much for your comments. According to your comments, we added more details of geological information in the “2.2 Field site locations” section. The parent material of the S1 testing site was a slope-diluvial deposit mixture of weathering materials, mainly including limestone and a small amount of dolomite of Triassic. The S2, S3, S4 S5, S6, S7, and S8 testing sites were composed of slope deposit and such weathering material as Triassic limestone. When we excavated the soil profiles to the depth of 125 cm, we cannot see the parent rock of each soil profile because the tested soils were deep. The relevant research done by our research group (Ci, 2020; Chen, 2019) along the sample sites indicated that, the parent rocks exposed around the sites S4 and S8 were found to be limestone with a hardness of 3-4. The dominant primary mineral was calcite, with a small amount of dolomite, quartz, feldspar and muscovite in these limestones. In addition, there was no loess distribution in the study area.
References:
- Ci, E. Soil series of China, Chongqing volume. Science Press, Beijing, 2020.
- Chen, L. Study on Genetic Characteristics and Taxonomy of Limestone Soils in Chongqing. Master Type, Southwest University, 2019.
Point 3: “forests” is international journal. Please explain the detail of Chinese domestic classification system for soil, climate, geology, etc. And compare to global systems, for improve your manuscript.
Response 3: Thank you very much for your comments. According to your comments, we added Chinese domestic classification system for soil and climate in in the “3.4 Soil classification” section and the “2.1 Geological setting” section, respectively. We hope the revised manuscript would be improved than that of previous version. In addition, we added the comparation of global systems in the “3.4 Soil classification” section and the “4. Discussion” section.
Detailed comments:
Point 1: Line 86, Why study in southwestern China? Did not state above section.
Response 1: Thank you for your comments. We deleted “southwestern” through the manuscript.
Point 2: Line 104-105, Please show this geographical boundary to Fig. 1.
Response 2: Thank you for your comments. We added the geographical boundary of Sichuan Basin and Hanzhong Basin in Fig.1.
Point 3: Line 106, northern and middle part of subtropical climate zone? Are these classification in local classification system? Please explain it.
Response 3: Thank you for your comments. We added the system of climate classification, please see line 97-106. In China, there are tropical climate, subtropical climate, temperate climate, temperate continental climate and alpine plateau climate. The subtropical climate is divided into north subtropical climate, middle subtropical climate and south subtropical climate. The boundary between the middle subtropical climate and north subtropical climate from west to east passes through the northern edge of Sichuan Basin, then follows the Ta-pa Mountain-Wudang Mountain watershed, and then stretches along the southern edge of Dongting Lake Basin, the north of Poyang Lake and the southern edge of Taihu Lake Plain in turn. Thus, the Ta-pa Mountains is an important geographical region across the northern and middle part of subtropical climate zone.
Point 4: Line 130, Typo, sweet Potatocone -> sweet Potato
Response 4: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 124.
Point 5: Table.1, Insert column for geological information. (line 166-171)
Response 5: Thank you for your comments. We inserted a column for geological information in Table.1.
Point 6: Line 145, “slope” -> slope gradient? Which kind of slope?
Response 6: Thank you for your comments. We had changed “slope” to “slope gradient”. According to the difference in land use and vegetation at different altitudes in the study areas, sampling areas with similar slopes gradient (between gently sloping and steep) at different altitudes were selected, please see line 137-139.
Point 7: Line 159, “In addition, the soil…the study site” is overlapped above section.
Response 7: Thank you for your comments. We have deleted the “In addition, the soil…the study site”.
Point 8: Line 166-171, Shown also in Table 1.
Response 8: Thank you for your comments. We inserted a column for geological information in Table.1.
Point 9: Fig.2, Typo, “Distabce(m)” -> Distance(m)
Response 9: Thank you for your comments. According to the comments of reviewer 2, the Fig. 2 contained similar information as table 1, so we have deleted the Fig. 2.
Point 10: Line 188, Which is correct “soil organic matter” or “soil organic carbon”? Please clarify.
Response 10: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 176.
Point 11: Line 241, “in all of the pedon…”, although some pedon had not Bt horizon.
Response 11: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 238-239.
Point 12: Line 245, “Bw1” may be “AB” horizon of S4 pedon. Please clarify.
Response 12: Thank you for your comments. According to the comments of reviewer 2, we deleted the description of sand content, so deleted the “AB horizon of S4 pedon”.
Point 13: Line 252, “significantly”; Please clarify using statistical analysis. Are these overlying horizons meet argillic property or argic horizon in ST and WRB?
Response 13: Thank you for your comments. According to your comments, we changed “significantly” to “obviously”, and the requirements of argic horizon (argillic horizon) were described in the “3.4 Soil classification” section.
Point 14: Line 258, I can not see the tendency of decrease of bulk density with elevation. Need more detail explanation.
Response 14: Thank you for your comments. We added more detail to explain, please see line 252-259. For pedons S1, S2, S3 and S4, the soil bulk densities were greater than 1.50 g cm-3 in all the horizons except the surface horizons, while the soil bulk densities of S5, S6 and S8 were less than 1.50 g cm-3 in all the horizons. At the same time, the decreasing bulk density of surface horizon was found from pedon S1 to S8 (Table 2). Therefore, the bulk densities tended to decrease with the increasing elevations, particularly in regard to the surface horizons.
Point 15: Line 264, Not generally. I think that has no trend with depth.
Response 15: Thank you for your comments. We had revised.
Point 16: Line 269, Why these base saturations did not determine? Over saturated in pH7 solution?
Response 16: Thank you for your comments. The pH values of some horizons (Bw1, Bw2 and Bw3) in the S1 and all horizons in S2 pedon were greater than 7.0. When determined the exchange Ca2+, there were a lot of carbonates in calcareous soil. So, the data of determination of calcareous soil were higher than actual exchange Ca2+content. However, we have not found a perfect method to determine the exchange Ca2+ in calcareous soil accurately.
Point 17: Line 294-295, Unclear the tendency decrease.
Response 17: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 293-294.
Point 18: Line 339, “Fig.3” had not include this content in this sentence. Another figure?
Response 18: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 338.
Point 19: Fig. 4, No title for each axis. “Pedon x” is correct to “Sx (S1,S2..)”.
Response 19: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see Fig. 3.
Point 20: Line 353-354, Difficult to understand.
Response 20: Thank you for your comments. We have revised.
Point 21: Line 362, Which wave length (peak) correspond? Not easy to compare this.
Response 21: Thank you for your comments. We have revised.
Point 22: Line 365, S7 and S8 had remain weak peak after heating, therefore, “disappeared” is not correct.
Response 22: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 361.
Point 23: Table 5, No explain in the result section.
Response 23: Thank you for your comments. We added the explain in the result, please see line 367-371.
Point 24: Line 388-390, “Distinctly” How many percent higher than overlying horizon? Is this criterion same as ST and WRB? S3, S4 and S7 have no L.C. of carbonate rocks, although these soils derived from carbonate rocks. Why? Had these soils not derived from carbonate rocks? Or, hidden for other high priority feature? Many readers do not well know the Chinese soil classification system. Please explain the detail of classification.
Response 24: Thank you for your comments. We revised, please see the “3.4 Soil classification” section. The argic horizon (argillic horizon) has different requirements in CST, ST and WRB. The pedons S2, S4, S5, S6, S7 and S8 can meet all requirements of argic horizon (argillic horizon) in CST, ST and WRB. In CST, the overlying eluvial horizons had 15 to 40 percent total clay in pedons, the total clay content in the subsurface horizons was 20 percent or more (relative) higher than that in the eluvial horizons. Or argillan was observed on both the vertical and horizontal surfaces of the pedons. Then the soils can be divided to argic horizon. In ST, the required characteristics of argillic horizon was the argillic horizon must have at least 1.2 times more clay than the eluvial horizon (the eluvial horizon has 15 to 40 percent total clay in the fine-earth fraction) or clay films was observed. In WRB, the criteria of argic horizon were the ratio of clay in the argic horizon to that of the overlying horizons (the overlying horizons has ≥ 10% and < 50% clay content in the fine earth fraction) was greater than 1.4; or clay coatings lining ≥ 5%. Besides, in CST, firstly there was a horizontally wavelife or discontinuous lithic contact of carbonated rocks with its upper boundary within 125 cm of the soil surface or there were carbonate rock fragments or weathered residual lime within 125 cm of the soil surface. Secondly, there were a base saturation percentage of 50 or more and a pH value of 5.5 or more in all soil horizons. When the pedons meet the two requirements, it has the lithologic characters of carbonate rocks (L.C. of carbonate rocks). The pH value of a few or all horizons in pedons S3, S4 and S7 is less than 5.5, so they had no L.C. of carbonate rocks.
Point 25: Line 420, “21.08” -> “30.52”
Response 25: Thank you for your comments. We have revised, please see line 436.
Point 26: Line 429, Do you have any evidence of exist of CaCO3 in these pedon?
Response 26: Thank you for your comments. According to your comments, we revised, please see line 444-447.
Point 27: Line 436, I think that these clay situation same as above pH situation, too.
Response 27: Thank you for your comments. According to your comments, we revised, please see line 451-452.
Point 28: Line 455-456, Over-discussion. This result was leaded from only 1 pedon. Please refer other evidences.
Response 28: Thank you for your comments. According to your comments, we added the references (Yan et al., 2011; Qiu, 2008; Liu et al., 2009; Peng et al., 2014).
References:
- Yan, N.; Bai, Z.; Xu, W.; Li, Y. Land use effect on soil aggregates in the karst hilly areas —A case study in Qianjiang Chongqing China. Carsologica Sinica 2011, 30, 72-77.
- Qiu, H. Comparative research of soil micromorphological characters on typical crop land and artificial ecological-forest eastern Guanzhong areas, Shaanxi province. Master Type, Shaanxi Normal University, 2008.
- Liu, X.; Zhang, G.; Heathman, G.C.; Wang, Y.; Huang, C. Fractal features of soil particle-size distribution as affected by plant communities in the forested region of Mountain Yimeng, China. Geoderma 2009, 154, 123-130.
- Peng, G.; Xiang, N.; Lv, S.; Zhang, G. Fractal characterization of soil particle-size distribution under different land-use patterns in the Yellow River Delta Wetland in China. J Soil Sediment 2014, 14, 1116-1122.
Point 29: Fig. 6, average and variance? Please state the detail in the figure or title.
Response 29: Thank you for your comments. We added the description of average and standard in the figure captions of Fig. 5.
Point 30: Line 533, Please state the distribution of these typical yellow soils in China. Are these soils distribute under colder climate?
Response 30: Thank you for your comments. According to your comments, we added the distribution of typical yellow soils in China, please see line 551-559.
Point 31: Line 544, Please explain the reason why this vegetation lead acidification or lacking of L.C. of carbonate rocks.
Response 31: Thank you for your comments. We revised, please see line 575-586. Compared to the sites at higher elevation, sites S3 and S4 had higher air temperatures, which were more suitable for the growth of Pinus massoniana Lamb. The roots of Pinus massoniana Lamb could exudate a variety of organic acids, which was conducive to the leaching of base ions in the soils. Under the higher temperature, the forest litter and topsoil organic matter of sites S3 and S4 were easy to decompose (Tian et al, 2019; Kong et al, 2000), a thinner (about 1-2 cm) O horizon was found in pedons S3 and S4, and the SOC content in surface horizon was also obviously lower in the two pedons than that in other forest soils at higher elevation (Table 2). The decomposition of these organic matters made more CO2 dissolve in the soil water, which could accelerate the corrosion of limestone fragments and the leaching of Ca2+ and Mg2+ in the soils. So, the lower pH values (<5.5) were found in the topsoil for podons S3 and S4 (Table 2). Therefore, those particular sites could not account for the L.C. of carbonate rocks.
References:
- Tian, K.; Kong, X.; Yuan, L.; Lin, H.; He, Z.; Yao, B.; Ji, Y.; Yang, J.; Sun, S.; Tian, X. Priming effect of litter mineralization: the role of root exudate depends on its interactions with litter quality and soil condition. Plant Soil 2019, 440, 457-471.
- Kong, F.X.; Liu, Y.; Hu, W.; Shen, P.P.; Zhou, C.L.; Wanga, L.S. Biochemical responses of the mycorrhizae in Pinus massoniana to combined e ects of Al, Ca and low pH. Chemosphere 2000, 40, 311-318.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Evaluated manuscript (ms) entitled: The pedogenesis of soil derived from carbonate rocks along a climosequence in a subtropical mountain, China represents descriptive study of soil pedogenesis of soils on carbonate rock in a subtropical mountain. Here are some major comments and questions that has to be answered before further consideration for publishing.
First of all – there is a scientific hypothesis missing. Some paragraphs in introduction part should be removed and whole manuscript should be more readable. Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 contained similar information as a table 1 and Table 2 respectively. The list of abbreviations should be added to the manuscript.
Material and methods parts should be shorted but some parts are confusing. E.g. soil colors were determined in dry or wet soil conditions (I found both in Table 2). Line 191 Did you determine base cations by means of Kjendal nitrogen analyser and Fed by UV-1200 spectrophotometer? Total element contents were measured by means of XRF. Please, rewrite analytical paragraphs of Material and methods parts, some references should be added to this part.
Texture, soil organic carbon (SOC) and carbonates should be in % than g kg-1 in Results part and Tables. Contents of SOC referred in Table 2 seems relatively low for Ah horizons with comparison of soil colour in Table 2 and Figure 1 (e.g. S5 only 2 % of SOC).
Conclusion is partly speculative and not surprising (e.g. soil classification). Authors analysed a lot of soil samples, but published study is highly descriptive.
Some minor correction:
Line 66 “soluble minerals” should be replaced by “easily weathered minerals”
Line 130 check “sweet Potatocorn” term
Line 177 air-dried to constant weight
Line 342 “total elemental analysis” should be replaced “total elements content” (amount, concentration…), should be also replaced through the manuscript.
Author Response
Point 1: Evaluated manuscript (ms) entitled: The pedogenesis of soil derived from carbonate rocks along a climosequence in a subtropical mountain, China represents descriptive study of soil pedogenesis of soils on carbonate rock in a subtropical mountain. Here are some major comments and questions that has to be answered before further consideration for publishing.
First of all – there is a scientific hypothesis missing. Some paragraphs in introduction part should be removed and whole manuscript should be more readable. Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 contained similar information as a table 1 and Table 2 respectively. The list of abbreviations should be added to the manuscript.
Response 1: Thank you for your comments. According your comments, we described scientific hypothesis more clearly, please see line 72-75. And some paragraphs in introduction part were removed, the unnecessary contents have been deleted (such as lines 60-62 and line 75-79 of previous version). We hope the revised “Introduction” section would be more readable than that of previous version. Then we have deleted the Fig. 2. Although the Fig. 3 contained similar information (clay and sand content) as Table 2. We deleted the sand content of Table 2. The clay content was used to calculate the requirements of argic horizon for soil classification. Fig. 3 shows the depth plots of grain size distribution within soil profiles more intuitively, especially for sand and slit particles. If you think it necessary, we will delete the Fig. 3. Besides, the list of abbreviations was added to the manuscript, please see line 625-632.
Point 2: Material and methods parts should be shorted but some parts are confusing. E.g. soil colors were determined in dry or wet soil conditions (I found both in Table 2). Line 191 Did you determine base cations by means of Kjendal nitrogen analyser and Fed by UV-1200 spectrophotometer? Total element contents were measured by means of XRF. Please, rewrite analytical paragraphs of Material and methods parts, some references should be added to this part.
Response 2: Thank you so much for your comments. According your comments, the unnecessary contents have been deleted were removed, (such as lines 106-112, line 150-153 and fig. 2 of previous version). We rewrite analytical paragraphs of material and methods parts and we have added the references for these parts.
References:
- hapman, H.D. Cation exchange capacity. In: Black, C.A. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI. USA, pp. 891– 900. 1965.
- Mehra, J.P., Jackson, M.L. Iron oxide removal from soils and clays by a dithionite–citrate–bicarbonate system buffered with bicarbonate sodium. Clays and Clay Minerals 7, 317-327. 1960.
- Sparks, D.L., Page, A.L., Helmke, P.A., Loeppert, R.H., Soltanpour, P., Tabatabai, M.A., Johnston, C.T., Sumner, M.E. (Eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3. Chemical Methods, Soil Science Society of America Book Series Amer Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 1996.
- Camobell, G.S., Horton, R., Jury, W.A., Nielsen, D.R., van Es, H.M., Wierenga, P.J., Dane, J.H. (co-editor, Topp, G.C.) (Eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods, Soil Science Society of America Book Series. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 2002.
Point 3: Texture, soil organic carbon (SOC) and carbonates should be in % than g kg-1 in Results part and Tables. Contents of SOC referred in Table 2 seems relatively low for Ah horizons with comparison of soil colour in Table 2 and Figure 1 (e.g. S5 only 2 % of SOC).
Response 3: Thank you so much for your comments. According to your comments, we had changed the g kg-1 to % of the texture in the “Results” section and Table 2, please see table 2 in the revised manuscript. By consulting some papers published in Forests, we found that g kg-1 was often selected as the unit of SOC and calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE) contents. So, we didn’t change the unit (g kg-1) for SOC and CCE contents in the manuscript. We have carefully checked the original determination record for the SOC content in Ah horizon of S5, and found that the relative error among three repeats was less than 5%, which indicated that the determination for the SOC content was accurate. In pedon S5, the soil organic C content (20.07 g kg-1) in Ah horizon was obviously higher the subsoils. Therefore, we think that the data for the SOC content in Ah horizon of S5 was correct and reasonable.
Point 4: Conclusion is partly speculative and not surprising (e.g. soil classification). Authors analysed a lot of soil samples, but published study is highly descriptive.
Response 4: Thank you. According to your comments, we have revised the conclusions, please see lines 604-624.
Detailed comments:
Point 1: Line 66 “soluble minerals” should be replaced by “easily weathered minerals”
Response 1: Thank you very much. According to your comments, we have revised, please see line 64.
Point 2: Line 130 check “sweet Potatocorn” term
Response 2: Thank you very much. According to your comments, we have changed “sweet Potatocorn” to “sweet Potato”, please see line 124.
Point 3: Line 177 air-dried to constant weight
Response 3: Thank you very much. According to your comments, we have revised, please see line 165.
Point 4: Line 342 “total elemental analysis” should be replaced “total elements content” (amount, concentration…), should be also replaced through the manuscript.
Response 4: Thank you very much. According to your comments, we have changed the “total elemental analysis” into “total elements content” through the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors’ comments and revisions to the manuscript have solved most of my questions, although few suggestions remained:
L104-106: Add temperature and precipitation of these boundary.
L187-193: When pH>7, CEC and exchangeable bases can be using the ISRIC method (van Reeuwijk 2002, Procedures for soil analysis, Technical Paper 9, ISRIC-FAO). Please consider to try it in next chance.
L524, L584: Rasmussen also found…Range of California [18] -> Rasmussen et al.[18] also found… Range of California.
Author Response
Point 1: The authors’ comments and revisions to the manuscript have solved most of my questions, although few suggestions remained:
L104-106: Add temperature and precipitation of these boundary.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments. According to your comments, we revised, please see line 106-108.
Point 2: L187-193: When pH>7, CEC and exchangeable bases can be using the ISRIC method (van Reeuwijk 2002, Procedures for soil analysis, Technical Paper 9, ISRIC-FAO). Please consider to try it in next chance.
Response 2: Thank you very much for your comments. We will try to use this method next time.
Point 3: L524, L584: Rasmussen also found…Range of California [18] -> Rasmussen et al. [18] also found… Range of California.
Response 3: Thank you very much for your comments. According to your comments, we have revised, please see line 507, line 567.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors highly improved manuscript but some methods part is not clear, please add more detail information about CEC determination by Kjeldahl nitrogen analyzer and UV spectrometer Fed determination (e.g. addition chemical, measured wavelength).
Author Response
Point 1: Authors highly improved manuscript but some methods part is not clear, please add more detail information about CEC determination by Kjeldahl nitrogen analyzer and UV spectrometer Fed determination (e.g. addition chemical, measured wavelength).
Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments. According to your comments, we have revised, please see line 179-192.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
