Investigation of Climatic Factors Affecting the Amount of Foraged Matsutake Mushrooms in Korea
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Review of the article “Investigation of Climatic Factors Affecting the Yield of Foraged Matsutake Mushrooms in Korea” (forests-3334299), resulting from revisions made after the first stage of review of the article “Investigation of Climatic Factors Effecting on Amount of Foraged Pine Mushroom in Yangyang-gun, Gangwon-do, Korea” (forests-3256250).
The authors made significant corrections that significantly improved the quality of the paper, enhancing its readability and substantive consistency. The current title better conveys the essence of the study carried out, which positively affects the readers' perception and understanding of the work's objectives.
In particular, the changes to Table 3 and Figure 3 provide significant support for the results presented, highlighting the most important findings and enabling a more convincing interpretation of the data. The editing of the conclusions section is now much clearer, making it easier for the reader to understand the main results and the importance of the research conducted.
In its current version, the article presents itself as a thorough and well-prepared research paper.
Author Response
Comments 1 : The changes to Table 3 and Figure 3 provide significant support for the results presented, highlighting the most important findings and enabling a more convincing interpretation of the data. The editing of the conclusions section is now much clearer, making it easier for the reader to understand the main results and the importance of the research conducted..
Response 1 : I'm glade that revision in Table and Figure and edition in conculsion section provide significant help to understand the paper. Thanks for your indication and guide.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
At this point, I have no further comments, as this is a resubmission of a previous paper that i revised a couple of times. The english language was much improved, all my previous issues were properly adressed and the manuscript was improved in all aspects.
Author Response
Comments 1 : At this point, I have no further comments, as this is a resubmission of a previous paper that i revised a couple of times. The english language was much improved, all my previous issues were properly adressed and the manuscript was improved in all aspects.
Response 1 : I'm glade that all your indications are improved well. Thanks for your indication and guide.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The determination of the laws of plant development from environmental parameters, geographical characteristics and other factors affects the prediction of plant productivity and ensuring food security. Thus, I think that the work is done on a current topic.
The authors made an attempt to determine the regression connection of the yield and environmental parameters. A fairly large data pool is considered, including information over 20 years, which involves obtaining a statistically significant result.
As comments, you should indicate the following:
1. The authors are not reflected the numerical results that exist at the moment. Existing models, their statistical parameters and significance.
2. It is not clear what difficulties the absence of these models causes.
3. The conditions for conducting research are not well described, for example, the area under consideration is not indicated.
4. The yield is given in tons, which does not reflect the productivity of a unit area or similar data.
5. The obtained models have quite low quality indicators.
6. Dependence on temperature in August does not take into account seasonal fluctuations in the environmental parameters.
7. The absence of reliable models indicates that not all factors affecting the yield of the product under consideration are taken into account. Perhaps the humidity of the soil, the intensity of solar radiation, the intensity of the movement of the juices and others should have analyzed.
8. It is worth considering the construction of more complex models, including machine learning models for data interpreting.
9. Conclusions do not contain numerical data on the results and progress in relation to existing studies.
Author Response
Comments 1 : The authors are not reflected the numerical results that exist at the moment. Existing models, their statistical parameters and significance.
Response 1 : Thanks for your indication. According to lines 228 to 236, we mentioned that few studies have examined the significant relationship between the yield of foraged Tricholoma matsutake and climatic factors. For the comparison with other studies, correlation between wild mushroom, temperature and precipitation was introduced. However, according to lines 237 to 245, direct comparison with wild mushroom study and this study has also limitation. Instead of reflecting the numerical results that exist at the moment, we secured the reliability of this investigation method by referring the previous wild mushroom studies.
Comments 2 : It is not clear what difficulties the absence of these models causes.
Response 2 :Thanks for your indication. The purpose of this study is to specify the climatic factor that has direct relationship with yield of the mushroom. Such a correlations are one of several factors for the yield of foraged Tricholoma matstuake, and the absence of these data could negatively affect the reliability of the predict model for the yield of mushroom.
Comments 3 : The conditions for conducting research are not well described, for example, the area under consideration is not indicated.
Response 3 : Thanks for your indication. The subject of this study is to identify the significant climatic factors affecting the yield of foraged Tricholoma matsutake in Yangyang-gun, Korea. Because the investigation target is relatively large, specific condition for narrow area is not considered. Instead, the survey of this study was conducted on the data from 2003 to 2023 in Yangyang-gun.
Comments 4 : The yield is given in tons, which does not reflect the productivity of a unit area or similar data.
Response 4 : Thanks for your indication. In this study, the yield of the matsutake mushroom has been investigated based on auction quantities reported by the Korea Forest Service and Forestry Cooperative in Korea, which oversees the reported yields of matsutake mushrooms. And the investigation was conducted on the total yield of foraged matsutake mushroom from the entire area of Yangyang-gun not from specific area. For this reason, we presented the yield of mushroom in Yangyang-gun as tons.
Comments 5 : The obtained models have quite low quality indicators.
Response 5 : Thanks for your indication. the utilization of the Augmented Dickey-Fuller test and ordinary least squares method in this study is due to the reliability, which equally utilized in recent studies for the correlation between foraged wild mushroom yield, temperature, and precipitation. And this correlation only confirms the linear form of direct relationship between mushroom yield and climatic factors. Despite the limitation, identification of significant climatic factors which affecting mushroom yield is possible.
Comments 6 : Dependence on temperature in August does not take into account seasonal fluctuations in the environmental parameters.
Response 6 : Thanks for your indication. According to line 223, condition for average temperature in August for predicting matsutake mushroom yield is presented. And if the condition is met, direct relationship between mushroom yield and average temperature in August is reliable. However, according to lines 224 to 227, if the temperature falls outside the condition, new correlation coefficient and model must be developed to address such alterations in temperature patterns.
Comments 7 : The absence of reliable models indicates that not all factors affecting the yield of the product under consideration are taken into account. Perhaps the humidity of the soil, the intensity of solar radiation, the intensity of the movement of the juices and others should have analyzed.
Response 7 : Thanks for your indication. As mentioned in section 3 and section 4, investigation for soil temperature, soil moisture, microorganisms in fairy rings are highly required for the construction of predict model. For these investigations, we are collecting the data.
Comments 8 : It is worth considering the construction of more complex models, including machine learning models for data interpreting.
Response 8 : Thanks for your indication. To answer this, as similar with the commend 5, the utilization of the Augmented Dickey-Fuller test and ordinary least squares method in this study is due to the reliability, which equally utilized in recent studies for the correlation between foraged wild mushroom yield, temperature, and precipitation. While the model in this study can only confirm the linear relationship between the foraged matsutake mushroom yield and climatic factors, this result can also serve as a significant factor for construction of reliable predicting model.
Comments 9 : Conclusions do not contain numerical data on the results and progress in relation to existing studies.
Response 9 : Thanks for your indication. According to lines 219 to 223, mushroom yield prediction under certain conditions was quantified, but this prediction is only about the linear relationship between the yield of foraged Tricholoma matsutake and average temperature in August. The main subject in this study is identification of significant climatic factors affecting the yield of matsutake mushroom, and we emphasized the average temperature in August is that significant factor as mentioned in conclusion section. In addition, to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings about the prediction of foraged mushroom yield, we didn’t present the numerical data on relation results.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The determination of the laws of plant development from environmental parameters, geographical characteristics and other factors affects the prediction of plant productivity and ensuring food security. Thus, I think that the work is done on a current topic.
The authors made an attempt to determine the regression connection of the yield and environmental parameters. A fairly large data pool is considered, including information over 20 years, which involves obtaining a statistically significant result.
Unfortunately, the comments given by the authors could not fully answer the questions asked.
First of all, it is worth understanding that the harvest considered by the authors is not the yield, since it is not reduced to the area. Therefore, an incorrect interpretation of the data is possible. It is worth making an adjustment and indicating that this is the dependence of the gross harvest on climatic factors.
In addition, I cite the questions that arose earlier:
1. The authors are not reflected the numerical results that exist at the moment. Existing models, their statistical parameters and significance.
2. It is not clear what difficulties the absence of these models causes.
3. The conditions for conducting research are not well described, for example, the area under consideration is not indicated.
4. The yield is given in tons, which does not reflect the productivity of a unit area or similar data.
5. The obtained models have quite low quality indicators.
6. Dependence on temperature in August does not take into account seasonal fluctuations in the environmental parameters.
7. The absence of reliable models indicates that not all factors affecting the yield of the product under consideration are taken into account. Perhaps the humidity of the soil, the intensity of solar radiation, the intensity of the movement of the juices and others should have analyzed.
8. It is worth considering the construction of more complex models, including machine learning models for data interpreting.
9. Conclusions do not contain numerical data on the results and progress in relation to existing studies.
Author Response
Comments 1 :The authors are not reflected the numerical results that exist at the moment. Existing models, their statistical parameters and significance.
Response 1 :Thanks for your indication. We recognized your indication and added the examples of study. In examples, we added the numerical result and statistical parameter that used. The sentences are presented in lines 228 to 242. In these lines, correlation between wild mushroom foraging, temperature, precipitation, and soil conditions are presented with numerical results.
Comments 2 :It is not clear what difficulties the absence of these models causes.
Response 2 :Thanks for your indication. According to lines 271 to 278, we emphasized the positive effects from the presence of the models. Specially, the correlation coefficient with 0.68 and the relation between 1-unit increase in tempera-ture and 1.5-tons increase in mushroom foraging indicated the significant effect on matsutake foraging by the average temperature in August.
Comments 3 :The conditions for conducting research are not well described, for example, the area under consideration is not indicated.
Response 3 :Thanks for your indication. Due to the difference in meaning of mushroom harvest, the meaning of foraging, we changed the words from yield to amount. I hope this will help to your understanding to our study.
Comments 4 :The yield is given in tons, which does not reflect the productivity of a unit area or similar data.
Response 4 :Thanks for your indication. Based on the utilization cases of mushroom foraging figures in the previous studies, we set tons as mushroom foraging figures. And the investigation was conducted on the total amount of foraged matsutake mushroom from the entire area of Yangyang-gun not from specific area. For this reason, we presented the yield of mushroom in Yangyang-gun as tons.
Comments 5 :The obtained models have quite low quality indicators.
Response 5 :Thanks for your indication. We recognize that Augmented Dickey-Fuller test and ordinary least squares method has low quality because these models only focused on the linear relationships between the mushroom foraging and climatic factors. However, based on previous study from Forests journal in 2023, utilization of these two models has reliability to predicting amount of foraged mushroom. I hope this will help to your understanding to our study.
Comments 6 :Dependence on temperature in August does not take into account seasonal fluctuations in the environmental parameters.
Response 6 :Thanks for your indication. According to line 223, condition for average temperature in August for predicting matsutake mushroom foraging is present. And according to lines 224 to 227, if the temperature falls outside the condition, new correlation coefficient and model must be developed to address such alterations in temperature patterns.
Comments 7 :The absence of reliable models indicates that not all factors affecting the yield of the product under consideration are taken into account. Perhaps the humidity of the soil, the intensity of solar radiation, the intensity of the movement of the juices and others should have analyzed.
Response 7 : Thanks for your indication. As mentioned in section 3 and section 4, according to lines 243 to 253 and 279 to 288, investigation for soil temperature, soil moisture, microorganisms in fairy rings are highly required for the construction of predict model. For these investigations, we are collecting the data.
Comments 8 :It is worth considering the construction of more complex models, including machine learning models for data interpreting.
Response 8 :Thanks for your indication. To answer this, we discovered the significant factor that influencing the matsutake mushroom foraging by using these models. Based on these model results, we are planned to use more complex models to identify more specific correlations between the amount of foraged mushroom and climatic factors.
Comments 9 :Conclusions do not contain numerical data on the results and progress in relation to existing studies.
Response 9 :Thanks for your indication. According to lines 295 to 299, we added the numerical data on the result and relation to existing studies.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The determination of the laws of plant development from environmental parameters, geographical characteristics and other factors affects the prediction of plant productivity and ensuring food security. Thus, I think that the work is done on a current topic.
The authors made an attempt to determine the regression connection of the yield and environmental parameters. A fairly large data pool is considered, including information over 20 years, which involves obtaining a statistically significant result.
The comments given by the authors mostly answer the questions asked and help with the perception of the results.
The authors have set the direction for further research and identified the factors that will be studied to improve the quality of the models.
As a remark, I would like to point out that it was worth assessing the quality of the obtained model, comparing it with existing ones and indicating what quality indicators of the model are required to obtain a reliable result.
Author Response
Comments : I would like to point out that it was worth assessing the quality of the obtained model, comparing it with existing ones and indicating what quality indicators of the model are required to obtain a reliable result.
Response : Thanks for your indication. As you indicated, we added the sentences regarding the quality of the result by the ADF-OLS model in lines 269 to 278. In this revision, the statistical value and reliability of the model was presented by t-statistic and p-value, while the limitation of the linear relationship between the amount of foraged matsutake mushroom and climatic factor was introduced by R2 value.
Also, in lines 291 to 297, we also mentioned existing Machine Learning techniques, such as Random Forests model, to introduce the non-linear relationship. And we mentioned that these introduced non-linear relationships could contribute on the obtaining of reliable result.
Finally, we added a new 35th reference to introduce non-linear relationship between mushroom foraging and environmental factors.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The work is aimed at revealing the pattern of collection volumes of one of the food products from the weather factor. Thus, it can be considered that the results contribute to food security. In addition, the authors indicate that this product can be used as a component of medical preparations, which also increases the significance and relevance of the study.
The authors considered a long time interval and the data considered can be considered representative.
The methodology for obtaining data and processing the results is described in sufficient detail.
A number of questions arose regarding the work:
1. The authors did not disclose the relevance of the study. There are no numerical data on the need, consumption rates, or the impact of the shortage on the population.
2. The assessment of the impact of only temperature and precipitation is not substantiated.
3. The mutual correlation of the factors under consideration has not been studied.
4. Optimal or recommended conditions for the growth of the mushrooms under consideration are not provided.
5. The initial data show that the volume of mushrooms collected is affected by external factors not specified. Thus, for August and September 2007, the temperature differs by less than 10 degrees Celsius, while the difference in the volume of the harvested crop is about 90%. This case is not isolated. 6. From the graphs presented in Figure 2, it is clear that with similar environmental parameters, there are significant fluctuations in the harvested crop. These deviations are not substantiated or described by the authors.
Author Response
Comments 1: The authors did not disclose the relevance of the study. There are no numerical data on the need, consumption rates, or the impact of the shortage on the population.
Response 1 : Gratitude for your comments. This study is focused on the effect of climatic factors including temperature and precipitation to the amount of foraged matsutake mushroom. Therefore, the evaluation for the mentioned factors was not conducted in this study. However, after proving the significantly high level of relationship between the mushroom and climatic factors, we will proceed the research concerned with what you mentioned.
Comments 2. The assessment of the impact of only temperature and precipitation is not substantiated.
Comments 3. The mutual correlation of the factors under consideration has not been studied.
Response 2 & 3 : Gratitude for your comments. This study was conducted base on the research for foraged wild mushroom by Alfranca et al in 2015 and Procházka et al in 2023. As one of the wild mushroom, we focused on annual amount of foraged matsutake mushroom in Yangyang-gun, Korea. Similar to these previous studies, we used augmented dickey-fuller test and Ordinary Least Squares models.
Comments 4. Optimal or recommended conditions for the growth of the mushrooms under consideration are not provided.
Response 4 : Gratitude for your comments. We provided the temperature range, between 21.8℃ and 26.2℃. In this ranges, foraged T. matsutake is predicted to be increased by 1.5 tons when the 1 unit of average temperature in Aug is increased.
Comments 5. The initial data show that the volume of mushrooms collected is affected by external factors not specified. Thus, for August and September 2007, the temperature differs by less than 10 degrees Celsius, while the difference in the volume of the harvested crop is about 90%. This case is not isolated.
Response 5 : Gratitude for your comments. Amount of foraged T. matsutake and average temperature in Aug showed significant but moderate degree of correlation index with 0.68. This result showed the limitation in predicting for the amount of foraged mushroom. However, we can identify that there is significant positive relationship between the foraged mushroom and the temperature in Aug. In addition, additional research will be conducted as several factors are carried out simultaneously in the growth of mushrooms.
Comments 6. From the graphs presented in Figure 2, it is clear that with similar environmental parameters, there are significant fluctuations in the harvested crop. These deviations are not substantiated or described by the authors.
Response 6 : Gratitude for your comments. In figure 2, the annual data regarding amount of foraged T. matsutake, average temperature, and average precipitation is presented. This data is to determine if there is a relationship between climate factors and amount of foraged T. matsutake. Since no noticeable association was identified between the three factors in this data, we divided them into monthly climate factors and conducted a relationship test.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The paper “Investigation of climatic factors effecting on amount of foraged pine mushroom in Yangyang-gun, Gangwon-do, Korea” by Choi and co-authors is about an interesting and current topic, and it could represent a good case study, concerning the effects of climate changes affecting the productivity of a forest resource, in this case the matsutake mushroom. But the paper has some flaws and the paper needs major improvements in English language, organization and presentation, in order to turn it more understandable.
Moreover, the paper is more a short note or short communication than a full article or research paper, considering the type and amount of data, and the work on those data.
Introduction must be rewritten in terms of English language, as the abstract. Also, the Tittle needs modifications too. It should be for example:
“Investigation of climatic factors affecting the productivity of matsutake in Yangyang-gun, Gangwon-do, Korea”
Materials and Methods: Authors must explain better how the data of foraged PM was gathered. I realize that data was obtained from the National Forestry Cooperative Federation and Yangyang Institute Technology, but nothing is explained. I mean, is this gathered by registered mushroom pickers, private stakeholders?
In figure 2, units for precipitation and temperature must be indicated in the Y axes.
There is no need to have a subsection 2.2 as the data is already showed above in the previous subsection (see figure 2).
Subsections 2.3 and 2.4 should be merged in an only subsection, entitled “Statistical analyses”.
Results
Authors analyse the all data they had access, but my question is: are there no replicates, in terms of studied plots for example? This would benefit the robustness of the results.
Moreover, if data from nearby regions or other regions from Korea, or even neighbour countries, could be obtained to have more knowledge of the reported tendencies, this would increase the robustness of the paper and the validation of the assumptions made.
Another issue is this:
Authors state that “…From the evaluation of OLS model, if the temperature range is between 21.8℃ and 26.2℃, foraged PM is predicted to be increased by 1.5 tons when the 1 unit of average temperature in Aug is increased. The data analysis with ADF test and OLS model indicated that the temperature, specially the average temperature in Aug in Yangyang-gun, had a positive effect on the amount of foraged PM”… (lines 196-200). But if we look at figure 2, since 2018 and 2022 there is a marked decrease in the productivity of matsutake and we see the temperature raising from 12ºC to 13ºC and 14ºC. By the way, the temperature scale is from 9-15ºC and the authors talk about values between 21.8℃ and 26.2℃ in terms of OLS Model. Is it reasonable to think about this temperature interval for the next years, even knowing that temperature is raising in the planet because of climate change?
In the Discussion of the results, authors need to compare their analyses and model and their results with others from other regions of the world, regarding the productivity of matsutake, or even if not possible, regarding the productivity of other edible mushrooms and how its productivity is affected by climate change. Only two studies are referred (references 24 and 25) and these two studies are not related directly or indirectly with mushrooms productivity; this is far too low and insufficient and unsatisfactory in my opinion.
Conclusions have to be shortened and sharper!
References must be added considering my considerations above.
In supplementary tables please indicate in which the columns are the values of temperature and precipitation (not only writing “average”). The average could also be referred to the production of matsutake in tons. I know that the average values are referring to temperature and precipitation, but this must be clear!
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The quality of the English must be deeply improved.
Author Response
Comments 1 : “Investigation of climatic factors affecting the productivity of matsutake in Yangyang-gun, Gangwon-do, Korea”
Response 1 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments. And we changed the title from [Investigation of climatic factors effecting on amount of foraged pine mushroom in Yangyang-gun, Gangwon-do, Korea] to [Investigation of climatic factors effecting on amount of foraged matsutake mushroom in Korea].
Comments 2 : Materials and Methods: Authors must explain better how the data of foraged PM was gathered. I realize that data was obtained from the National Forestry Cooperative Federation and Yangyang Institute Technology, but nothing is explained. I mean, is this gathered by registered mushroom pickers, private stakeholders?
Response 2 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments. As the data regarding amount of mushroom is obtained by the foraged matsutake mushroom by registered mushroom pickers, we added the sentence, [From this institute, foraged mushrooms from registered mushroom pickers were identified and the amount of foraged T. matsutake in Yangyang-gun was inferred.].
Comments 3 : In figure 2, units for precipitation and temperature must be indicated in the Y axes.
Response 3 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments. However, there is a limitation to display the temperature and precipitation in same Y axes due to the difference in value units. So we added the related units to the name of graph line, and the Y axes to be referenced was distinguished by referring to the right or left.
Comments 4 : There is no need to have a subsection 2.2 as the data is already showed above in the previous subsection (see figure 2).
Response 4 : Gratitude for your comments. Despite the figure 2 was mentioned in section 2.1, this section regarding conceptual frameworks which organizing how and why this research process goes on. Also in section 2.2, we added more details in process of obtaining the data.
Comments 5 : Subsections 2.3 and 2.4 should be merged in an only subsection, entitled “Statistical analyses”.
Response 5 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments and the two sections were combined.
Comments 6 : Authors analyse the all data they had access, but my question is: are there no replicates, in terms of studied plots for example? This would benefit the robustness of the results.
Moreover, if data from nearby regions or other regions from Korea, or even neighbour countries, could be obtained to have more knowledge of the reported tendencies, this would increase the robustness of the paper and the validation of the assumptions made.
Response 6 : Gratitude for your comments. This study has robustness in data by evaluating the long periods of data instead the replicates. Also, we agree with that adding nearby region will increase the robustness of the paper. So we are planning the evaluating the correlation in not only Yangyang-gun but whole Gwangwon-do in Korea.
Comments 7 : Authors state that “…From the evaluation of OLS model, if the temperature range is between 21.8℃ and 26.2℃, foraged PM is predicted to be increased by 1.5 tons when the 1 unit of average temperature in Aug is increased. The data analysis with ADF test and OLS model indicated that the temperature, specially the average temperature in Aug in Yangyang-gun, had a positive effect on the amount of foraged PM”… (lines 196-200). But if we look at figure 2, since 2018 and 2022 there is a marked decrease in the productivity of matsutake and we see the temperature raising from 12ºC to 13ºC and 14ºC. By the way, the temperature scale is from 9-15ºC and the authors talk about values between 21.8℃ and 26.2℃ in terms of OLS Model. Is it reasonable to think about this temperature interval for the next years, even knowing that temperature is raising in the planet because of climate change?
Response 7 : Gratitude for your comments. The figure 2 in section 2.1 is regarding annual temperature and precipitation and in this data, we can’t discover the certain relationship between the amount of foraged matsutake mushroom and climatic factors. So, we re-affirmed the relationship by subdividing the annual temperature and precipitation by month. And After ADF test, the climatic factors with stationarity were confirmed and among them, average temperature in Aug showed the highest correlation index to the matsutake mushroom in Table 3 (we added it). The significant mushroom and temperature correlation graph is presented in Figure 3 (we added it) by using the logged amount of foraged matsutake mushroom and average temperature in Aug. In addition the reason of the range in temperature is that such correlation was conducted by data(mushroom and climatic factors) measured during the investigation periods.
Comments 8 : In the Discussion of the results, authors need to compare their analyses and model and their results with others from other regions of the world, regarding the productivity of matsutake, or even if not possible, regarding the productivity of other edible mushrooms and how its productivity is affected by climate change. Only two studies are referred (references 24 and 25) and these two studies are not related directly or indirectly with mushrooms productivity; this is far too low and insufficient and unsatisfactory in my opinion.
Response 8 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments and added more references, 14 and 15(which newly added one).
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The article entitled “Investigation of Climatic Factors Effecting on Amount of Foraged Pine Mushroom in Yangyang-gun, Gangwon-do, Korea” addresses an important topic regarding the influence of climatic factors on the collection of pine mushrooms. However, the title of the article is too specific regarding the research site, which is not necessary at this level. I recommend limiting the title to the research subject and climatic conditions, and the detailed information about the research site should be included in the methodology and research objectives.
The introduction correctly defines the abbreviation “PM” for pine mushroom, but this abbreviation is used too often, which may affect the flow and comprehensibility of the text. I suggest consulting a professional language editor to improve the style and avoid excessive use of abbreviations.
The methodology was well-chosen for the purpose of the research and described in a comprehensive manner, which is its strong point. This allows for the experiment to be repeated and the results to be reliably verified.
Line 168: The statement “significant differences between the minimum and maximum” is inadequate and requires correction. It is obvious that statistical variables will have different values. Statistical studies are based on variability, and if it were not, the analysis would be unnecessary. Appropriate statistical indicators, such as skewness and kurtosis, should be provided here, and the compliance of the data distribution with the normal distribution should be considered. This information is important for assessing the reliability of the results.
Figure 2: The graph requires clarification – please add units and descriptions of the Y1 and Y2 axes to make the presentation of the data clearer.
Despite the narrow scope of the research and the features analyzed, the article provides valuable information on the influence of climatic factors on the collection of pine mushrooms. It can also be a basis for further research verifying other determinants influencing the studied feature. The results are presented in a generally correct manner, although it is worth expanding the discussion with additional statistical interpretations.
The article, although it describes the research results well, requires minor stylistic and statistical interpretation corrections. Reducing the excessive detail in the title and adding missing descriptions in the graphs will improve the quality of the work. Despite these comments, the article can be a valuable contribution to further research on the impact of climate on the productivity of pine fungi.
Author Response
Comments 1 : The introduction correctly defines the abbreviation “PM” for pine mushroom, but this abbreviation is used too often, which may affect the flow and comprehensibility of the text. I suggest consulting a professional language editor to improve the style and avoid excessive use of abbreviations.
Response 1 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments and changed the name as Tricholoma matsutake or matsutake mushroom.
Comments 2 : Line 168: The statement “significant differences between the minimum and maximum” is inadequate and requires correction. It is obvious that statistical variables will have different values. Statistical studies are based on variability, and if it were not, the analysis would be unnecessary. Appropriate statistical indicators, such as skewness and kurtosis, should be provided here, and the compliance of the data distribution with the normal distribution should be considered. This information is important for assessing the reliability of the results.
Response 2 : Gratitude for your comments. In this study, we analyze the descriptive statistics for the amount of foraged matustake mushroom by using outlier analysis like previous study by Procházka’s team in 2023. And due to the lack of reliable in the amount of foraged matsutake mushroom in survey periods, we logged the data and obtain the reliability.
Comments 3 : Figure 2: The graph requires clarification – please add units and descriptions of the Y1 and Y2 axes to make the presentation of the data clearer.
Response 3 : Gratitude for your comments. We agree with your comments. However, there is a limitation to display the temperature and precipitation in same Y axes due to the difference in value units. So we added the related units to the name of graph line, and the Y axes to be referenced was distinguished by referring to the right or left.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The work is aimed at revealing the pattern of collection volumes of one of the food products from the weather factor. Thus, it can be considered that the results contribute to food security. In addition, the authors indicate that this product can be used as a component of medical preparations, which also increases the significance and relevance of the study.
The authors considered a long time interval and the data considered can be considered representative.
The methodology for obtaining data and processing the results is described in sufficient detail.
Despite the guidance provided by the authors, it remains unclear what the recommended conditions for maximum stability should be. It is also unclear how to change the characteristics of the final product when environmental factors change.
In general, I believe that most of the questions that arose during the review process can be used for further research.
Author Response
Comments 1 : It remains unclear what the recommended conditions for maximum stability should be.
Response 1 : Gratitude for your comments. The correlation between foraged matsutake mushroom and average temperature in Aug is constructed based on the investigation date from 2003 to 2023. On the premise that the temperature exists in range, from 21.8℃ to 26.2℃, foraged mushroom is predicted to be increased by 1.5 tons when the 1 unit of average temperature in Aug is increased. So, the recommended condition of temperature in Aug is from 21.8℃ to 26.2℃.
Comments 2 : It is also unclear how to change the characteristics of the final product when environmental factors change.
Response 2 : Gratitude for your comments. From the data of investigation from 2003 to 2023, average temperature in Aug showed the highest positive relationship with the amount of foraged matsutake mushroom. However, as you mentioned, there is possibility to change of relationship due to the global climatic changes in 21th century. Due to this change, the significant effect of average temperature in Aug may be reduced or increased. Alternatively, the correlation with matsutake mushroom foraging may change to other temperature factors instead of average temperature in Aug. To respond this changes, continuous investigation and correlation updates between the mushroom and factors are necessary.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The paper “Investigation of climatic factors effecting on amount of foraged matsutake mushroom in Korea” by Choi and co-authors was slightly improved but continues with some of the same problems, like the English language. Moreover, it must be transformed into a short communication. I stand on this opinion, considering the type and amount of data, and the work on those data and also the number of references.
I was not totally convinced with the explanations given by the authors to some of my previous questions. Nevertheless, some parts are better explained now, for example, the data collection of foraged matsutake.
In summary, besides some improvements done by the authors especially in the Materials and Methods section, the paper still needs major improvements, particularly in English language and in the discussion of the results, and in terms of comparison with similar works. Only two more references were added and these are works done in Europe, and not focused on matsutake.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
English language must be revised and deeply improved!
Author Response
Comments 1 : English language improvements.
Response 1 : Gratitude for your comments. As we agree with your indication, we have modification in English language using the editing service in Forests journal. We also revised the sentences in [Result and Discussion] and [Conclusion] to emphasize the conditions for the correlation construction in this study.
Comments 2 : Improvements in Discussion of the results (Terms of comparison with similar works).
Response 2 : Gratitude for your comments. And we also agree with your indication. About the comparison, unfortunately, there were no significant investigations for the direct correlation between the amount of matsutake mushroom and climatic factors including temperature and precipitation. Instead, as matsutake mushroom is included in wild mushroom, we focused on the recent study for correlation between wild mushroom and climatic factors by Alfranca’s team in 2015 and Procházka’s team in 2023 (mentioned in section 2.1). In addition, instead of direct comparison, we focused on the correlation between growth of matsutake mushroom mycelium and climatic factors including temperature and precipitation (studies by Yamanaka's team in 2020 and Yamada's team in 2022). With these two groups, we investigated and analyzed the relationship between the T. matsutake foraging and climatic factors.
Comments 3 : Addition of References
Response 3 : Gratitude for your comments. Finally, in reference, we added references (number, 26,27,28,29,30) to emphasize the correlation result in other wild mushroom studies with precipitation, temperature, and soil conditions.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Authors,
I am afraid but again the quality of the english language and grammar is poor. The language is very limited and this turns the paper difficult to be read. Moreover, as i said, this study could be transformed into a short communication considering the limited quantity of data and the analysis that was performed.
Also, again my issue related to comparisons with other areas producing matsutake or other Tricholoma species when and where available, has to be better addressed. These comparisons are needed to be done! I understand that the studies on matsutake can be rare, but what about other studies with other congeneric species?
Also, the authors state that:
“However, this comparison is bound to be limited due to the difference condition for development between wild mushroom and T. matsutake. While wild mushroom has a wide range of required temperatures for development, T. matsutake requires the temperature between 19℃ and 20℃ for development. And only T. matsutake requires the pine tree as a host plant”: again my point is: the species requires temperatures between 19 and 20 ºC and then the authors refer that “From the evaluation of OLS model, if the temperature range is between 21.8℃ and 26.2℃, foraged T. matsutake is predicted to be increased by 1.5 tons when the 1 unit of average temperature in Aug is increased. I mean, and I ask again, is it reasonable to talk about these temperature intervals? Aren’t they contradictory? Please explain better!
Moreover, this paragraph must be rewritten:
“However, this positive correlation between matsutake mushroom and temperature is due to the temperature range which constructed during the investigation periods. Also, in analysis of correlation coefficient, degree with 0.68 is moderately high and do not always ensure the close relationships between matsutake mushroom foraging and temperature. Despite these limitation, significant positive correlation between the amount of foraged T. matsutake and average temperature in Aug is identified and this correlation is expected to act as one of the significant factors effecting the amount of foraged T. matsutake.”
As already said, Conclusions have to be shortened and sharper and rewritten! They were even extended by the authors and i really do not understand some of those. First five sentences/lines of conclusions are very poorly constructed!
See for example here:
“However, this positive correlation between matsutake mushroom and temperature is due to the temperature range which constructed during the investigation periods. Also, in analysis of correlation coefficient, degree with 0.68 is moderately high and do not always ensure the close relationships between matsutake mushroom foraging and temperature.” This is almost imperceptible.
Lines between 277 and 291 must also be rewritten!
Normally, there are no references in the Conclusions.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
As said over and over, the english language must be really improved. This is my third revision and i do not see any real or substantial improvement. i would advise a native english speaker to help the authors writting the paper.
