Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript present an evaluation of biodiversity in traditional olive groves and semi-natural patches in the same landscape.
The introduction is well explaining the state of the art and the objective of the study. the material and methods and results are consistent and well exposed.

Overall the manuscript is well written and suitable for pubblication.

some minor changments in text :
line 71. Therefore, in these regions olive landscapes are usually heterogeneous
line 199 delete "then"

table 4 in the statistics column it's MT and not T

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 comments:

The manuscript present an evaluation of biodiversity in traditional olive groves and semi-natural patches in the same landscape.
The introduction is well explaining the state of the art and the objective of the study. the material and methods and results are consistent and well exposed.

Overall the manuscript is well written and suitable for pubblication.

REPLY: Thanks.

 

some minor changments in text:
line 71. Therefore, in these regions olive landscapes are usually heterogeneous

REPLY: done

line 199 delete "then"

REPLY: done

 

table 4 in the statistics column it's MT and not T

REPLY: done

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is very interesting paper explaining an importance of mixed agricultural and forest patches in terms of biodiversity. The results are valuable and can be used for GIAHS application, for instance.

For international audiences, authors may be able to improve the following points.

Abstract should be more simplified and shortened.

Study area section needs further explanations about geographic conditions including slope degrees and directions, annual precipitation and its monthly variety, soil type and typical soil profile and thickness  etc.

In relation to this, Figure 1 should be improved, for instance by adding topographic relief using DEM. Also vegetation map can be overlaid, or at least authors can add more text explanations in the map about forest patch type, dominant tree names etc.

Moth sampling methods are too limited (even considering references). Authors can add the light equipments in detail including model name etc., and photos of sampling situations are very helpful to visually understand methods appropriateness.

Figure 2 looks like inspiring misreading of these numbers differing among sites and types. Now bigger circles look like all same sizes, so perhaps circle sizes should be subject each number sizes to visually compare among sites. I know it is difficult to make complete proportional because of layout, but can be improved as far as possible.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 comments:

This is very interesting paper explaining an importance of mixed agricultural and forest patches in terms of biodiversity. The results are valuable and can be used for GIAHS application, for instance.

REPLY: thanks

 

For international audiences, authors may be able to improve the following points.

Abstract should be more simplified and shortened.

REPLY: We shortened the abstract by simplifying some phrases.

 

Study area section needs further explanations about geographic conditions including slope degrees and directions, annual precipitation and its monthly variety, soil type and typical soil profile and thickness etc.

In relation to this, Figure 1 should be improved, for instance by adding topographic relief using DEM.

REPLY: We added most of requested information, but we are not able to add supplementary information on the soil.

 

Also vegetation map can be overlaid, or at least authors can add more text explanations in the map about forest patch type, dominant tree names etc.

REPLY: done

 

Moth sampling methods are too limited (even considering references). Authors can add the light equipments in detail including model name etc., and photos of sampling situations are very helpful to visually understand methods appropriateness.

REPLY: done

 

Figure 2 looks like inspiring misreading of these numbers differing among sites and types. Now bigger circles look like all same sizes, so perhaps circle sizes should be subject each number sizes to visually compare among sites. I know it is difficult to make complete proportional because of layout, but can be improved as far as possible.

REPLY: done

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

      As a reviewer, I would suggest adding pictures of the light traps and including landscape information in the papers. The authors can enhance the data visualization by incorporating these images.

      Regarding the A and B sites located close to the mountain ridge, it would be beneficial to include analyses on habitat and species community composition. The authors can improve the paper by addressing this aspect.

      Overall, the results indicate that species compositions are significantly influenced by semi-natural habitats and olive groves. This finding is noteworthy and adds to the significance of the study.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 comments:

As a reviewer, I would suggest adding pictures of the light traps and including landscape information in the papers. The authors can enhance the data visualization by incorporating these images.

REPLY: We added a picture of the used light trap positioned within the olive grove.

 

Regarding the A and B sites located close to the mountain ridge, it would be beneficial to include analyses on habitat and species community composition. The authors can improve the paper by addressing this aspect.

REPLY: Unfortunately, we cannot include analyses on habitat and species community composition because we were unable to gather data concerning vegetation during the study period other than those provided in the study area paragraph.

 

Overall, the results indicate that species compositions are significantly influenced by semi-natural habitats and olive groves. This finding is noteworthy and adds to the significance of the study.

REPLY: Thanks.