Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Make the small changes suggested in the attached document. Clearly state the objectives of the scientific article.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review Gazol et al.
April 11 2025

This fascinating article tackles two goals, the first is to introduce a novel drought-vulnerability index relating tree basal area index to ring width response to precipitation. The second goal is to apply this and related metrics to spatial and especially to temporal variation in dry NE Spain, for seven species. I have enjoyed reading this paper and found it innovative and thought-provoking and useful.    The integration of data and the associated graphics seem masterful, if a little complex,  given all the variables being pulled together.
My concerns are mostly minor matters of clarity and style, “food for thought,” more than table-thumping demands.
Is the new abbreviation “dVI” for drought Vulnerability Index likely to be confused with the pre-existing “Deforestation Vulnerability Index”?
Is the caption and associated explanation of Fig. 1 more complex than necessary, given that the dVI is the readily computed and intuitive as the product of the two scaled axes?  (As stated later, line 250)     Also, showing both the scaled and unscaled axes is mildly confusing at first glance.
On p 3, define RWI and SPEI here where they first appear.   Maybe list abbreviations at the end?
Line 118.  That seems an overly broad statement despite the citation.
I’d suggest including authorship (and perhaps families) with first appearance of species names in the text, or tabulated.
Line 142, the angiosperms aren’t in bold.
Because it is relevant to Figure 3, it would help to include monthly precip data. What is the seasonal rainfall pattern?
Is Ephedra major the correct name for the species in Spain?  Any chance it is E. fragilis?   I do not personally know, but look for example at Plants of the World Online (POWO) adds a second layer of confusion.   There is an indication there that Ephedra major should be a synonym under E. foeminea.    https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:383420-1
Of course POWO is not 100 percent authoritative, but they are worth taking seriously and resolving any discrepancies that appear there.   That is especially true with their definitive abbreviation “nom. utique rej.”
Line 290 define rbar and EPS?  Terms known in dendrochronology but probably not familiar to readers coming from different angles.
Table 2, add the actual species names (and populations)  for user-friendliness?
Fig. 5 and other figures, at least in the review copy, the light blue P. lentiscus line is hard to discern.
Fig. 7c, refers to J. oxycedrus, but the color in the figure looks like the color code for J. thurifera.
Lines 377 and 413, might be clearer to actually name the species.  Readers might not know which are trees/shrubs.
Line 374 refers to present results and to literature. Should be one or the other, it seems. Or worded differently.
The following point is implicit in the article (such as at line 367),  so I’m not pinpointing a faultl,  but still it might help to point out more explicitly that vulnerability to drought-induced temporary growth reduction is not necessarily the same as vulnerability to  permanent decline,  major dieback, unrecoverable vascular cavitation, and death.   Below-average or postponed growth may reflect favorable adaptation for drought tolerance.   
There are several small typos and probable translation issues.   The ones I marked while reading are on lines:  67, 81, 87, 119 (period needed), 129 (italics needed),  206 (change to table S1),  292, fig 6 (some months in capital letters, other not, and in lower-right corner oxycedrus has a typo), 392, 397, 424,  461, 463

Hope this helps.  Looking forward to seeing the final article.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf