Review Reports
by
- I. Wayan Susi Dharmawan1,*,
- Yunita Lisnawati1 and
- Asep Sukmana1
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Dragana Čavlović
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is a very interesting paper about reforestation in tropical peat swamps.
Please provide additional explanations on the following two points.
1. How old is the peat swamp soil in this study? A rough estimate is fine, so please add it if you know it.
2. Do you know the three-phase distribution (proportion of solid, liquid, and gas phases) at each study site? If you have measured it, please add it.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you very much for your comments and please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is devoted to an interesting topic and deserves publication after eliminating the following comments.
The abstract does not reflect the main content of the article and should be completely rewritten. This should be done in such a way that after reading only the abstract, the main points in the article are clear: relevance, purpose, methods, results and conclusion.
The title of the article is very general and does not reflect the main purpose of the publication. The name should be made more concise.
In general, this will become a review and I will indicate this at the very beginning.
A very confusing narrative that does not make clear the main idea of this publication.
The purpose of the article is evaluation. What kind of assessment? I didn't see it in the article.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you very much for your comments and please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
The subject you are addressing in this manuscript is quite important. The restoration of peatlands is especially important in the context of the battle with climate changes. Selection of the right techniques, procedures, species for the restoration projects is crucial for their success.
The manuscript titled Enhancing Climate Resilience through Adaptive Vegetation Models in Tropical Degraded Peat Swamp Forest Restoration Initiatives clearly leads the reader to it's point.
However, it would be useful if you could emphasize the meaning and the context for the Adaptive Vegetation Model. Nowadays, models are usually tied with computer modelling, therefore I suggest that the authors clear the possible misunderstanding right away.
Also, please pay attention to the terminology, such as adaptive-native, vegetation species, etc. Some of those terms are not conventional, so if you are introducing them, please elaborate them on the first mention.
Last, but not least- since this is the review paper, the authors are strongly advised to elaborate how the review process underwent, how many references were included, what was the methodology for the searching of the references (key words, search engines, etc.). Maybe consider more systematic approach of the presentation of the reviewed results- there are more than few repetitive statements, and the paper itself is very extensive.
More specific comments are in the attached document.
Kindest regards.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
The overall quality of English language is good. There are some chapters where it could be improved.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Thank you very much for your comments and please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf