Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Author

The manuscript very interesting, however needs to clear for improving the manuscript : 

1. Please make clear for figure 1 and 3, better to add toponimi (name of place) on figure 1 and legend on figure 3.

2. please make clear for methodologies, have to clear how to census using photointerpretation work and how to validated

3. please make clear about result and discussion, please focus and make detail and cleare to the objective.

4. I am wondering, why there is no conclusion in this paper.       

Author Response

Thank you for taking the time to do this work.
We have attempted to make the requested changes based on your instructions. As you highlighted, the first version of the paper had some shortcomings, we tried to correct and implement the work as much as possible in the short time we had. The figures have been improved and added, the methodological part of the mapping and verification has been integrated, it was not described in the first version due to lack of time. Conclusions have been added and references implemented.
Added parts are shown in red.

Reviewer 2 Report

A brief summary:

Lately, there is an increasing emphasis on ecosystem services. Research has been carried out in areas where trees outside forests (TOF) are found in central Italy. This research area is currently neither developed nor exploited.

Through various analyzes, the authors have tried to highlight the importance of trees outside forests and their benefits offer to society. 

Broad comments:

 The topic of research is quite important, although it is currently not sufficiently researched. It is about the benefits of trees outside the forest, and more specifically, about the ecosystem services they provide. Using photointerpretation techniques, the authors have managed to capture, with high accuracy, changes in land cover. The methodology used can be used successfully in other research because it has been described in detail.

This type of research will certainly be used more and more in the future, gradually replacing much of the field work.

The results obtained were well highlighted in the Discussion chapter. 

However, this manuscript still needs to be completed to reach a publishable form.

Specific comments:

Abstract: It is well written, highlighting the main aspects of the paper and the topic.

 

L12: The sentence must start with capital letter.

INTRODUCTION:

The "Introduction" chapter presents many aspects of the "state of the art" in this field, in which the importance of trees outside forests (TOF) is clearly presented. However, there are still some aspects that should be clarified, which are not difficult to do, such as a citation on the methodology of the Italian National Forest Inventory. I also noticed that at the end of the chapter the aim and objectives of the research are not clearly defined. These should be introduced, in order for the reader to understand what the authors wanted to achieve with this study.

 

L50-51: Please provide citation.

 

Materials and Methods:

 

 

The authors have included in this chapter very accurate information, which has been described very clearly. The presentation of this information has been done with a good fluency, giving the readers a good first impression.

However, there are small issues that need to be adjusted, as follows:

 

L66-67: word "Figure" is use repeating

 

L72: Please introduce some information about mean temperature and mean precipitations.

 

L73: North Arrow is missing and also the map coordinates.

 

L89-100: There is no reference in the text to Figure 2 before it.

 

L101: North arrow is missing from Figure 2.

 

L116: Use "one" instead of "1"

 

L126: “Figure” word is used for two times.

 

L133: Provide correct citation formatting eq. [34,35]

 

 

Results:

The authors manage to capture well the results of this case study. These are presented in great detail, and can be reproduced using the proposed methodology. I have noticed that the tables are easy to understand and interpret and regarding the figures are relatively good.

In particular I would add:

L160: The word "Table" is repeating.

L167: The word "Table is repeating.

L178: The word "Table" is repeating.

L194: The word "Table" is repeating.

L203: The word "Figure" is repeating.

L207: In Figure 3, the North arrow is missing, and coordinates.

L218: The word "Figure" is repeating.

L220: The word “Table” is repeating.

Discussion:

This chapter is in addition to the Results chapter and the research results are well explained and the cited bibliography supports this information.

I noticed that the "Conclusions" chapter is missing. I know that according to the journal publication instructions, this chapter is not mandatory. However, the article ends too abruptly, in the "Discussion" chapter there is not much on conclusions and future recommendations. So, I think the authors should introduce the "Conclusions" chapter or develop the "Discussion" chapter a bit.

 

L246: What is “ettart”? This wasn’t defined earlier in text.

L286-291: The paragraph is similar to that of L282-286. Please remove it.

 

References:

 

The bibliography is quite diverse and relatively new.

Author Response

Thank you for taking the time to do this work.

We have attempted to make the requested changes based on your instructions. As you highlighted, the first version of the paper had some shortcomings, we tried to correct and implement the work as much as possible in the short time we had. The figures have been improved and added, the methodological part of the mapping and verification has been integrated, it was not described in the first version due to lack of time. Conclusions have been added and references implemented.

Added parts are shown in red.

We responded point by point to the requests (highlighting the actions taken in green):

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf