Profound Transformations of Mediterranean Wetlands Compared to the Past: Changes in the Vegetation of the Fucecchio Marsh (Central Italy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article shall be re-written from scratch because it is too long and to difficult to grasp a meaningful content. A lot of useless descriptions need simplified and there must be a thorough explanation of the climate change process, correlated with the past and present plant diversity.    

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Profound transformations of Mediterranean wetlands compared to the past: the case of the Fucecchio Marsh vegetation (central Italy)

Lorenzo Lastrucci and Daniele Viciani

REVIEW REPORT.

Manuscript overview (summary)

The authors performed a phytosociological analyses of wetland vegetation in central Italy. They surveied aquatic and palustrine plant communities in one of the largest and most significant marshes of that country, and which is listed in the Ramsar convention.  Additionally the authors indicate that studies of plant communities in the area are surprisingly scarce. Therefore, the aim of the study seems to be comparing the data of the surveys with previous findings, and outline  the changes that have occurred in the landscape.

To address the mentioned objectives, the authors performed 155 relevés of plant communities through classic phytosociological methods. They distinguished aquatic and palustrine vegetation, but only palustrine vegetation was analysed through a cluster analysis of Bray-Curtis dissimilarity. They also employed the syntaxonomic nomenclature to classify and describe the vegetal communities found.

As main results, they propose establishing a new plant association named Cyperetum micheliano-difformis and they describe 34 plant communities (aquatic and palustrine) according to the “Vegetation of Europe” (Mucina et al 2016) and the International code of phytosociological nomenclature (Theurillat et al 2021).

General comments:

The manuscript  is relevant for the field and presented in a well-structured manner. It contains valuable information about the plant communities that mediterranean wetlands house. Such aquatic and marsh vegetation should be considered of conservation interest and must be studied to manage preservation strategies and asses the degree of human transformation that it has gone (and is going) through.

However, in terms of research, the work has several weknesses. The main concern is that the only analitycal/statistical tool employed to clasify plant communities was the generation of a dendrogram. Even-though the work is mainly descriptive, there are more statistical tools that may give support to the proposed classification. The authors should at least, include a multivariate analyses to their methods, and if posible, incorporate climatic or environmental data to it. In case of having environmental data, authors may compare statistically the communities found. Twinspan can also be performed to complement the analyses and support the results. Additionally, several ecological metrics for each community can be calculated (richness and diversity).

The complete dataset is composed of aquatic and palustrine communities. However only palustrine communities were statistically analyzed, because “…it was not necessary for the few (16 relevés) and well differentiatied aquatic plant communities…”. Contrary to the authors point of view, aquatic communities should be included. The suggestion is to perform a first analyses to verify the differentiation that authors perceive using the aquatic relevés as an “outgroup”, and subsequently perform a second classification including only the palustrine relevés, in order to achieve the differentiation observed in the field.

The syntaxonomic descriptions are quite extense, in a style more appropiate for a floristic treatment than a research article. The syntaxa that were previosuly known/described should be more concisely characterized. The section “3.3 Past and present vegetation”, although it is interesting and important, looks like a short review of previous works. Therefore, it shall be shortened and managed as a resource to explain the results seen, not as a result per se.

Conclusions are not clearly justified and supported by the results. They should directly follow the results, for example “## communities found, ## syntaxa described”, and a brief comparison between present and past conditions. Everything else is part of the discussion.

The objectives need to be more clearly stated.

The title does not emerge from the results nor the abstract contains the objectives, methods, and results found.

Figures and writing should be improved.

General recommendation:

Reconsider after major revisions

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In general English language is understandable. There are some parts where sentences are confusing, but can easily be improved. I included some minor comments in the manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I would like to congratulate you on your excellent work entitled “Profound transformations of Mediterranean wetlands compared to the past: the case of the Fucecchio Marsh vegetation (central Italy).” I truly enjoyed reading it. The study provides very important ecological and vegetation data, and the relevé tables are a valuable resource not only for Italy but also for broader European vegetation research.

º Main research question and relevance
The study clearly addresses the question of how the vegetation of the Padule di Fucecchio marsh has changed compared to the past, with particular attention to the aquatic and marsh plant communities. This is of great importance because wetlands are globally threatened ecosystems, and such site-specific long-term comparisons are rare but essential.

º Originality and contribution
The topic is highly original. The Padule di Fucecchio is one of the largest and most important Italian inland marshes, but — as the authors emphasise — its vegetation had not been studied in detail for decades. The work fills an important gap by documenting 155 new relevés and classifying them into 34 vegetation types. It also describes new syntaxa and documents the expansion of invasive alien species. This is an important contribution to the study of Mediterranean wetland vegetation and provides a valuable basis for conservation and monitoring.

º Scientific merit and added value
Compared to previously published material, this work provides the most detailed and systematic analysis ever carried out for this site. The addition of newly recorded community types and a completely new association (Cyperetum micheliani-difformis) emphasises the novelty of the work. Beyond Italy, it also provides a reference for Mediterranean and European wetlands where similar ecological pressures occur, making the results valuable for comparative analyses.

º Methodological rigour
The methodology is sound and follows standard, widely accepted phytosociological approaches (Braun–Blanquet method, Van der Maarel scale, cluster analysis in R). The distinction between aquatic and palustrine communities is justified, and the cluster analysis is appropriately complemented by expert ecological judgement. The sample size is robust, and the integration of historical sources strengthens the diachronic perspective. I find the methodological framework rigorous and appropriate for the aims of the study.

º Conclusions
The conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented. The authors convincingly show that sensitive aquatic and marsh species have largely disappeared, and been replaced by resilient native and invasive alien taxa, and that the overall structure of marsh vegetation has undergone profound changes. The ecological interpretation is convincing and is well supported by the data.

º References
The references are extensive and appropriate, citing both classical phytosociological work and more recent international syntheses. They place the results appropriately in the wider context of European wetland ecology.

º Tables and figures
The tables and figures are of high quality, clear, and well organised. They not only provide evidence, but are also an important resource for future comparative studies. The tables on vegetation are particularly valuable and will also be useful for researchers not directly involved in the topic of the article. I have already mentioned them in my previous email.

º Overall assessment
This is an excellent and comprehensive piece of research. The study is timely, methodologically sound, and makes an important contribution to the understanding of vegetation dynamics in Mediterranean wetlands. I am confident that it will serve as a reference for future ecological and conservation studies.

º Recommendation
I maintain my recommendation for acceptance, with only (if any)minor editorial changes where necessary.

Congratulations again on this fine contribution.

Sincerely,
Reviewer_2

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been improved, considering several of the previous recommendations provided. Objectives are clearer, some results regarding aquatic communities have been included, and general comments related to the text have also been considered. Yet there is still room for improvement to do.

I consider authors should include an ordination method, bioclimatic variables and diversity meassures. 

The work still is important and interesting for readers an for local diversity managers, therefore its worth trying to improve it.

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf