Soil and Vegetation Cover and Biodiversity Transformation of Postagrogenic Soils of the Volga-Oka Interstream Area
, Sergey Shoba 1, Elena Bykova 1, Pavel Shutov 2, Oleg Saveliev 2 and Roman Repkin 2
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study identified three types of transformation of post-agrogenic lands characteristic of the initial and intermediate overgrowth stages of pre-climax communities using a total of 24 control sites characterizing post-agrogenic areas and specific phytocenoses that are not used in agricultural activities. They found that as a result of agricultural overgrowing, the species richness of plant communities was sharply reduced, the remediation of which in the foreseeable future is very problematic. They suggested that in order to preserve biodiversity, it seems advisable to intersperse croplands with uncultivated plots of sufficiently large sizes, which can serve as a kind of natural ecosystem preservation banks. However, the article does not clearly explain how land use is transformed. It is suggested to use Markov model to quantitatively show the transformation between different land use types. In additions, many problems about the description of methods and results require to be solved.
1. Why does the reference begin at 28? The order of references in the article should be rearranged.
2. In the Result part, many indicators (including ShI. Shannon Index; BM—Herbaceous Plant Biomass, t/ha; HC. Humus Content, %) are used, but the specific values are not seen in the article. And whether these indicators have changed significantly after land use transformation needs statistical analysis.
3. The article is divided into 5 cluster groups (1-CG. 1st Cluster Group; 2-CG. 2nd Cluster Group; 3-CG. 3rd Cluster Group; 4-CG. 4th Cluster Group; 5-CG. 5th Cluster Group;). Why are they divided into these five groups? What is the grouping basis?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Dear expert reviewer,
The authors acknowledge to the reviewer for working on our article and useful comments, they were taken into account in the process of its correction and will be used in further work.
- Why does the reference begin at 28? The order of references in the article should be rearranged.
The order of references was corrected
- In the Result part, many indicators (including ShI. Shannon Index; BM—Herbaceous Plant Biomass, t/ha; HC. Humus Content, %) are used, but the specific values are not seen in the article. And whether these indicators have changed significantly after land use transformation needs statistical analysis.
The values of the indicators are given in the table and partially shown in the text. They are also used for cluster analysis.
The article did not analyze the dynamics of the land state, this was not the work objective.
The current state of overgrown lands was analyzed, they were compared with each other (according to the indicators listed in the description of methods) since they were in different states according to these data, and their comparison was carried out with natural lands on which control (reference) sites were laid.
- The article is divided into 5 cluster groups (1-CG. 1st Cluster Group; 2-CG. 2nd Cluster Group; 3-CG. 3rd Cluster Group; 4-CG. 4th Cluster Group; 5-CG. 5th Cluster Group;). Why are they divided into these five groups? What is the grouping basis?
The areas closest in three characteristics (Shannon index, phytomass, humus content) are combined into one cluster. Five clusters were selected by expert evaluation of the results. The number of clusters is selected by expert evaluation. In this case, we decided that 5 clusters is the most optimal number. Grouping is performed automatically using the statistics program by Ward’s method.
The purpose of this analysis was to show that the sites located in different landscapes may be similar in these indicators, which is one of the confirmations of leveling landscape features in the process of postagrogenic transformation.
Reviewer 2 Report
I consider this manuscript to be interesting and meaningful in relation to post-agrogenic transformation, but it needs the following several revisions.
1. The keywords are too long. Change the keywords to something like anthropogenic transformation, agricultural overgrowth, species diversity etc.
2. The numbers of control site differs in 'materials and methods' and 'results and discussion'. That is, 24 sites in Tables 1 and 2, 22 sites in Table 3, and 18 sites in Figures 3 and 4.
3. The description of the tables and figures presented in 'results and discussion' is very insufficient.
4. Page 9, lines 191-204: this content is desirable to describe under 'Materials and Methods'.
5. Page 9, lines 195: Present the hummus gradation like Shannon Index and Plant Biomass in the text.
6. Page 9, lines 196-204: Authors suggested the gradation for Shannon index and phytomass, but the values of Shannon index and phytomass on some sites outside the suggested gradation range. Please redefine the gradation.
7. In Table 4, IV.04 was classified as 2nd cluster group. But I think it belongs to the 1st cluster group according to Figure 3.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Dear expert reviewer,
The authors acknowledge to the reviewer for working on our article and useful comments, they were taken into account in the process of its correction and will be used in further work.
- The keywords are too long. Change the keywords to something like anthropogenic transformation, agricultural overgrowth, species diversity etc.
Keywords were corrected - The numbers of control site differs in 'materials and methods' and 'results and discussion'. That is, 24 sites in Tables 1 and 2, 22 sites in Table 3, and 18 sites in Figures 3 and 4.
The differences in the number of sites are explained by the fact that they were used for different types of analysis. The corresponding explanations to tables and figures are included in the text of the article.
Tables 1-2 show all control sites, including sites with natural vegetation and occupied for agricultural land, which were used for comparison. Figures 3 and 4 show 18 sites since they were used for clustering of post-agrogenic territories and sites with natural vegetation and agricultural lands were not taken into account here. Table 3 shows the characteristics of control sites with the exception of agricultural lands since we conducted a comparative characteristic of the biodiversity in post-agrogenic and natural territories.
- The description of the tables and figures presented in 'results and discussion' is very insufficient.
The article has been revised accordingly. We have tried to expand the analytical part as much as possible.
- Page 9, lines 191-204: this content is desirable to describe under 'Materials and Methods'.
Corrected
- Page 9, lines 195: Present the hummus gradation like Shannon Index and Plant Biomass in the text.
Corrected
- Page 9, lines 196-204: Authors suggested the gradation for Shannon index and phytomass, but the values of Shannon index and phytomass on some sites outside the suggested gradation range. Please redefine the gradation.
Clustering was carried out only for sites in post-agrogenic territories.
Reference sites (6 pieces) which indicators exceed the gradation scale were not used for clustering (I-02, IV-08 – agricultural lands; I-07 – typical meadows; II-02, IV-01, IV-05 – typical forests). The corresponding explanation is included in the article
- In Table 4, IV.04 was classified as 2nd cluster group. But I think it belongs to the 1st cluster group according to Figure 3.
Clustering is carried out automatically in the program Statistica by Ward’s method. Therefore, unfortunately, we cannot change the position of sites in cluster groups. We can agree that expert evaluation of clustering may not coincide with automatic data processing.
Reviewer 3 Report
Manuscript entitled “Soil and vegetation cover and biodiversity transformation of postagrogenic soils of the Volga-Oka interstream area” by Trifonova and others.
Authors highlighted the importance of biodiversity transformation through different approaches, and they have compared based on more than 15 of history.
They identified three types of transformation of post-agrogenic lands characteristic of the initial and intermediate overgrowth stages of pre-climax communities: field overgrowth associated with a change in land use; field overgrowth with nearby forest; field overgrowth without nearby forest.
Abstract: Quantification is missing
Keywords: Should be different from title (5 to 7 only), revised it
Introduction: The introduction is interesting, though; I suggest adding a few relevant case studies that investigated similar issues to make this section more exhaustive. It also can represent the scientific place of this work.
Objectives of study should be added in the end of the introduction section.
Materials and Method: add geographical situations (Mpas with coordinates)
Add weather data of study periods.
Add a flow diagram of methodological sequences.
Add comparative photographs of study area (old & current)
Data analysis: should be define properly.
Result & discussion: well written, pl add quantify data, pl add your results value/percentage changes, etc. and also add relevant references during the discussion. Add scientific reason.
Conclusion: Quantify data is missing add future relevance also
It would be nice to have the future scopes of the research, maybe a few, that could deepen our SDGs.
Overall, manuscript have very informative information, need major modification in abstract, M & M and conclusion.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Dear expert reviewer,
The authors acknowledge to the reviewer for working on our article and useful comments, they were taken into account in the process of its correction and will be used in further work.
1.Abstract: Quantification is missing
Corrected
2.Keywords: Should be different from title (5 to 7 only), revised it
Corrected.
3.Introduction: The introduction is interesting, though; I suggest adding a few relevant case studies that investigated similar issues to make this section more exhaustive. It also can represent the scientific place of this work.
Adjustments have been made, additional publications are included in the Introduction section
4.Objectives of study should be added in the end of the introduction section.
Corrected
5.Materials and Method: add geographical situations (Mpas with coordinates)
Corrected
6.Add weather data of study periods.
Climatic characteristics of the territory are given in the article
7.Add a flow diagram of methodological sequences.
The description of the sequence of studies was corrected in the article. The block scheme of clustering is available in the article.
8.Add comparative photographs of study area (old & current)
Satellite images of the studied territory made in different times were added
9.Data analysis: should be define properly.
Corrected
10.Result & discussion: well written, pl add quantify data, pl add your results value/percentage changes, etc. and also add relevant references during the discussion. Add scientific reason.
We have made appropriate corrections to the text.
As for the percent change. The article did not analyze the dynamics of the lands state, this was not the purpose of the research.
The current state of overgrown lands was analyzed, they were compared with each other (according to the indicators listed in the description of the methods) since they were in different states according to these data and their comparison was carried out with natural lands on which control (reference) sites were laid.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
no comments
Author Response
Dear expert reviewer,
The authors acknowledge to the reviewer for working on our article and useful comments.
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript is much improved by reflecting the review opinions. Thank you for your careful revision.
Author Response
Dear expert reviewer,
The authors acknowledge to the reviewer for working on our article and useful comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Authors incorporated all suggestions; this version should be considered for further process.
Author Response
Dear expert reviewer,
The authors acknowledge to the reviewer for working on our article and useful comments
