Impact of Grazing Intensity on Floristic Diversity and Soil Properties in Semi-Natural Grasslands of Jbel Bouhachem (Northern Morocco)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work presented by Dr Chakri and co-authors is important because it deals with a serious problem that affects many Mediterranean countries, namely the impact of grazing and overgrazing on the natural environment and particularly on vegetation.
I would suggest, however, that a number of points could be clarified:
1/ Grazing and grazing intensity: there is no indication of the type of animals grazing in the meadows studied. Cows? Horses? Sheep? Goats? Several species mixed together? The impact is certainly not the same depending on the animal species.
It would also be interesting to know how the intensity of grazing has been estimated, and whether the animals are on site all year round or brought in by shepherds during the summer (transhumance?).
2/ No information is provided on the vegetation in terms of the presence of ‘heritage’ species, endemic species, etc. It would be interesting to know whether overgrazing has led to the local extinction of endemic species, for example.
3/ It would be interesting to know what the authors of this work plan to do in the future, and I'm thinking in particular of the possibility of setting up exclosures, even if they are certainly difficult to create in a context of strong anthropic pressure. As this is a highly protected site, it would be interesting to know whether a total ban on grazing is feasible.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1

Comments 1:

Grazing and grazing intensity: there is no indication of the type of animals grazing in the meadows studied. Cows? Horses? Sheep? Goats? Several species mixed together? The impact is certainly not the same depending on the animal species. It would also be interesting to know how the intensity of grazing has been estimated, and whether the animals are on site all year round or brought in by shepherds during the summer (transhumance?).

Response 1:

Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have clarified the type of animals responsible for grazing and the methodology used to estimate grazing intensity. These revisions are now included in Section 2.2 (page 3 and 4, paragraph 1-2, lines 104–124) of our manuscript. We describe that grazing pressure in the Jbel Bouhachem massif is primarily exerted by goats, sheep, and cattle, with a more occasional presence of equines. Grazing intensity was estimated in livestock units per hectare (LU/ha), taking into account both the spatial distribution of settlements and the number of animals per household. We also specified that while most grazing occurs year-round near inhabited areas, traditional seasonal movements, particularly summer transhumance (July to September), persist in two remote grasslands (Menzla and Bab Miiz) where herders temporarily relocate their flocks to access higher-elevation pastures. Peak grazing activity is observed in spring and early summer, when forage productivity reaches its maximum. "[Updated text in the manuscript: "Grazing pressure in the Jbel Bouhachem massif is primarily exerted by goats, sheep, and cattle, with a more occasional presence of equines. According to field surveys and semi-structured interviews with local pastoralists, livestock densities vary according to the proximity of villages and herd sizes. Grazing intensity was therefore estimated in livestock units per hectare (LU/ha), taking into account both the spatial distribution of settlements and the number of animals per household, which directly influence pressure on ecological resources. While most grazing occurs year-round near inhabited areas, traditional seasonal movements still persist. Specifically, summer transhumance (July to September) is maintained in two remote grasslands—Menzla and Bab Miiz—where herders temporarily relocate their flocks to access higher-elevation pastures. Across the massif, peak grazing activity is observed in spring and early summer, when forage productivity reaches its maximum."]"

Comments 2:

No information is provided on the vegetation in terms of the presence of ‘heritage’ species, endemic species, etc. It would be interesting to know whether overgrazing has led to the local extinction of endemic species, for example.

Response 2:

Thank you for this relevant suggestion. We have now specified the presence of heritage and endemic species in the discussion (Section 4.1, page 10, paragraph 2, lines 347–354). We mention that among the 70 recorded species, several are of patrimonial or conservation interest, including rare or endemic taxa such as Ophioglossum lusitanicum, Isoetes histrix, and Ranunculus ficaria. Their presence confirms the ecological value of Bouhachem’s grasslands. However, current data do not provide evidence of local extinction events linked to overgrazing, which is considered a marginal pressure in the massif. Long-term biodiversity monitoring is recommended to assess potential shifts in species persistence and community composition over time. "[Updated text in the manuscript: "Among the 70 recorded species, several are of patrimonial or conservation interest, including rare or endemic taxa such as Ophioglossum lusitanicum, Isoetes histrix, and Ranunculus ficaria. Their presence confirms the ecological value of Bouhachem’s grasslands. Nevertheless, current data do not provide evidence of local extinction events linked to overgrazing, which is considered a marginal pressure in the massif. Long-term biodiversity monitoring is recommended to assess potential shifts in species persistence and community composition over time."]"

Comments 3:

It would be interesting to know what the authors of this work plan to do in the future, and I\'m thinking in particular of the possibility of setting up exclosures, even if they are certainly difficult to create in a context of strong anthropic pressure. As this is a highly protected site, it would be interesting to know whether a total ban on grazing is feasible.

Response 3:

Thank you for your insightful suggestion. We have addressed future management perspectives, including a discussion of exclosures and regulatory feasibility, in Conclusion (page 13, paragraph 4, lines 447 –453). Although this study does not currently propose setting up grazing exclosures, it emphasizes the need for a differentiated management strategy tailored to local realities. A complete ban on grazing is not considered feasible, as these grasslands are vital resources for traditional pastoral systems in the Rif. The ‘Agdal’ system, a customary-managed land model used in the High Atlas, could inspire a future pastoral management strategy for the Bouhachem Park, which currently lacks a specific regulatory framework.

[Updated text in the manuscript: Although this study does not currently propose setting up grazing exclosures, it emphasizes the need for a differentiated management strategy tailored to local realities. A complete ban on grazing is not considered feasible, as these grasslands are vital resources for traditional pastoral systems in the Rif. The ‘Agdal’ system, a customary-managed land model used in the High Atlas, could inspire a future pastoral management strategy for the Bouhachem Park, which currently lacks a specific regulatory framework."]

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
Manuscript ID: Ecologies-3659214

Title:  Impact of Grazing Intensity on Floristic Diversity and Soil Properties in Semi-Natural Grasslands of Jbel Bouhachem (Northern Morocco)

Authors:  Saïd Chakri, Ahmed Taheri, Fatima El Lamti, Susan Canavan, Mohamed Kadiri  and Mohammed Mrani  Alaoui

 

The topic of the article is extremely interesting, it shows the complex effect of grazing. The main strength of the manuscript is that the studies were conducted in a rare and internationally protected area. However, the area is not described, we do not know the bedrock, the altitude above sea level and the main vegetation unit. In line 96, he refers to certain data, but these are not described in detail (unpublished data, in preparation).

The map helps to understand and Figure 2. is also very informative. The article does not reveal what kind of animals and how many are grazed in the given area. What does overgrazing mean in this case. The sampling arrangement is not balanced either, 5 site with intensive and 3 site with moderate grazing pressures were compared. In line 101 heterogeneous and homogeneous spots are not defined either.

In addition to botanical surveys, several other studies have been completed, however the individual elements of the study are not organically connected to each other, the botanical, soil and microbiological parts are almost independent of each other.

As for the results, the floristic part is too general, this is not a list suitable for a grazing article. When presenting the area, it would be worth presenting the main species and associations.

It is surprising to me that intensive grazing ensured a higher number and diversity of species. It would be worth presenting the species that gave the surplus, because they may be common, weed-like species. The results contradict the moderate disturbance theory, so this part is worth supporting better.

Overall, I suggest a significant revision, providing the missing basic information and highlighting the main points.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2

Comments

1. Summary Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1:

Area description (bedrock, altitude, vegetation unit) Reviewer's original comment: "However, the area is not described, we do not know the bedrock, the altitude above sea level and the main vegetation unit."

Response 1:

Thank you for your observation. We agree and have expanded the site description to include geological, altitudinal, and vegetation details in Section 2.1 (page 2, paragraph 3, lines 95-103) of our manuscript. We now specify that the massif's geomorphological and ecological context is shaped by acidic sedimentary substrates such as flysch, mauretanian, and numidian sandstones, which are highly prone to erosion due to historical deforestation. The elevation gradient (575–1658 m) creates distinct bioclimatic zones, ranging from sub-humid to per-humid. This topographic and climatic stratification supports three major vegetation belts: evergreen Quercus rotundifolia woodlands in lower zones, deciduous oak stands (Q. faginea, Q. pyrenaica) at mid-elevations, and high-altitude coniferous forests (Pinus pinaster subsp. maghrebiana, Cedrus atlantica). These forests coexist with semi-natural pastures, peat bogs, and ephemeral wetlands, forming a complex mosaic of habitats.

"[Updated text in the manuscript: "The landscape of Bouhachem is highly heterogeneous (Fig. 2). In addition to semi-natural grasslands, the region encompasses various ecosystems, including heritage wetlands (peat bogs, temporary ponds) and relict vegetation types such as cedar, tauz, zéne oak, and cork oak forests. Additionally, the massif's geomorphological and ecological context is shaped by acidic sedimentary substrates such as flysch, mauretanian, and numidian sandstones, which are highly prone to erosion due to historical deforestation. The elevation gradient (575–1658 m) creates distinct bioclimatic zones, ranging from sub-humid to per-humid. This topographic and climatic stratification supports three major vegetation belts: evergreen Quercus rotundifolia woodlands in lower zones, deciduous oak stands (Q. faginea, Q. pyrenaica) at mid-elevations, and high-altitude coniferous forests (Pinus pinaster subsp. maghrebiana, Cedrus atlantica). These forests coexist with semi-natural pastures, peat bogs, and ephemeral wetlands, forming a complex mosaic of habitats."]"

Comments 2:

Animals and overgrazing definition Reviewer's original comment: "The article does not reveal what kind of animals and how many are grazed in the given area. What does overgrazing mean in this case?"

Response 2:

Thank you. As with Reviewer 1, we have clarified these aspects in Section 2.2 (page 3/4, paragraph 1/2, lines 104-124 and page 2, paragraph 3, lines 104-124) of our manuscript. We describe that grazing pressure in the Jbel Bouhachem massif is primarily exerted by goats, sheep, and cattle, with a more occasional presence of equines. Grazing intensity was estimated in livestock units per hectare (LU/ha), taking into account both the spatial distribution of settlements and the number of animals per household. We also specified that while most grazing occurs year-round near inhabited areas, traditional seasonal movements, particularly summer transhumance (July to September), persist in two remote grasslands (Menzla and Bab Miiz) where herders temporarily relocate their flocks to access higher-elevation pastures. Peak grazing activity is observed in spring and early summer, when forage productivity reaches its maximum. Overgrazing, in this context, refers to grazing pressure that exceeds the carrying capacity of the land, leading to degradation of vegetation and soil, as further elaborated in the introduction.

"[Updated text in the manuscript: "Grazing pressure in the Jbel Bouhachem massif is primarily exerted by goats, sheep, and cattle, with a more occasional presence of equines. According to field surveys and semi-structured interviews with local pastoralists, livestock densities vary according to the proximity of villages and herd sizes. Grazing intensity was therefore estimated in livestock units per hectare (LU/ha), taking into account both the spatial distribution of settlements and the number of animals per household, which directly influence pressure on ecological resources. While most grazing occurs year-round near inhabited areas, traditional seasonal movements still persist. Specifically, summer transhumance (July to September) is maintained in two remote grasslands—Menzla and Bab Miiz—where herders temporarily relocate their flocks to access higher-elevation pastures. Across the massif, peak grazing activity is observed in spring and early summer, when forage productivity reaches its maximum. In Mediterranean landscapes, grazing plays a dual ecological role. On one hand, it can lead to vegetation degradation, loss of soil fertility, and biodiversity decline when overgrazing occurs."]"

Comments 3:

Sampling arrangement imbalance Reviewer's original comment: "The sampling arrangement is not balanced either, 5 sites with intensive and 3 sites with moderate grazing pressures were compared."

Response 3:

Thank you for this remark. We have acknowledged this imbalance and explained its rationale in Section 2.3 (page 4 , paragraph 1, lines 130-137) of our manuscript. We state that this sampling imbalance (5 vs 3) reflects the actual spatial distribution of grazing pressure in the massif, as confirmed through field interviews and on-site observations. This approach ensures that our study accurately represents the prevailing conditions in the study area.

"[Updated text in the manuscript: "Between May 2022 and June 2024, eight semi-natural grasslands were selected following a prior ecological survey conducted in 2021–2022, which aimed to identify gradients of grazing intensity and internal ecological heterogeneity. Five of these grasslands (Amsemlil, Bab-Miiz, Amokssisar, Menzla, and Marjabou) were subject to intensive grazing, while the remaining three (Bab Ataba, Tayrsal, and Tafaefra) experienced moderate grazing (Fig. 2, 1–8). This sampling imbalance (5 vs 3) reflects the actual spatial distribution of grazing pressure in the massif, as confirmed through field interviews and on-site observations."]"

Comments 4:

Heterogeneous and homogeneous spots definition Reviewer's original comment: "Heterogeneous and homogeneous spots are not defined either."

Response 4:

Thank you for pointing this out. We have clarified our definitions in Section 2.3 (page 5, paragraph 2, lines 142-146) of our manuscript. We define homogeneous units as plots exhibiting consistent slope, vegetation structure, and edaphic characteristics, enabling standardized comparison across grasslands. Conversely, heterogeneous grasslands show internal variation in microtopography and plant composition, thus requiring stratified sampling to ensure representative ecological data.

"[Updated text in the manuscript: "In this study, we define homogeneous units as plots exhibiting consistent slope, vegetation structure, and edaphic characteristics, enabling standardized comparison across grasslands. Conversely, heterogeneous grasslands show internal variation in microtopography and plant composition, thus requiring stratified sampling to ensure representative ecological data."]"

Comments 5:

Floristic part too general Reviewer's original comment: "The floristic part is too general, this is not a list suitable for a grazing article. Present the species that gave the surplus."

Response 5:

Thank you. We agree and have now provided examples of ruderal species that contributed to the increased richness under intensive grazing in Section 3.1 (page 6 and 7, paragraph 3, lines 227-237) of our manuscript. We specify that intensively grazed grasslands harbored ruderal and disturbance-adapted taxa such as Filago pyramidata, Trifolium repens, Ranunculus bulbosus, and Cistus crispus. This provides more specific floristic information relevant to the grazing context.

"[Updated text in the manuscript: "Intensively grazed grasslands harbored ruderal and disturbance-adapted taxa such as Filago pyramidata, Trifolium repens, Ranunculus bulbosus, and Cistus crispus."]"

Comments 6:

Results contradict moderate disturbance theory Reviewer's original comment: "Results contradict the moderate disturbance theory. This part is worth supporting better."

Response 6:

Thank you. We have elaborated on this in Section 3.3 (page 7/8, paragraph 3, lines 262 - 269) of our manuscript by linking our findings to the intermediate disturbance hypothesis and the concept of spatial patchiness. We explain that this pattern is consistent with the concept of grazing-induced patchiness, which has been shown to promote diversity in low-input grasslands (Tonn et al., 2019). Consequently, our findings align with the intermediate disturbance hypothesis, whereby increased diversity under intense grazing reflects structural variability rather than improved ecological integrity. "[Updated text in the manuscript: "Although no statistically significant differences in species richness or Shannon diversity were detected between grazing intensities, a slight trend toward higher values under intensive grazing was observed. This tendency suggests that grazing may help limit the dominance of competitive species and foster coexistence among a broader range of plant taxa. These dynamics are well-documented in Mediterranean grasslands, where moderate to high grazing pressure can prevent competitive exclusion and sustain floristic diversity by enhancing spatial heterogeneity and generating disturbance-driven microhabitats [30,8,31]. This pattern is consistent with the concept of grazing-induced patchiness, which has been shown to promote diversity in low-input grasslands (Tonn et al., 2019). Consequently, our findings align with the intermediate disturbance hypothesis, whereby increased diversity under intense grazing reflects structural variability rather than improved ecological integrity."]"

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The MS addresses a topic of certain interest, especially in the Mediterranean context but, in my opinion, it requires a profound revision in all its parts to remedy some critical issues that I will highlight below.

The most critical point concerns the fact that two grazing intensities are compared (without defining the methodology to distinguish them) but the comparison with control sites is missing, which is essential to understand and discuss the results obtained.

The second problem concerns the methods that are not adequately described, therefore not replicable: 1)reference is made to a classification of grazing intensity that has not yet been published (in preparation), and therefore cannot be consulted and this cannot be accepted; please add this information. 2) explain why the 1m² plot was divided into 25 subplots or refer to a specific protocol; are you sure that the plot size is adequate to capture the taxonomic diversity in the Mediterranean grasslands? 3) describe the methods for the soil analysis; 4) describe the methods for the microbiological analysis.

In the introduction, the topic “grazing”, with all its ecological implications, should be illustrated (even just by focusing on the Mediterranean region); please include also the positive aspects.

In the results, the division into subparagraphs makes it difficult to understand the data, I would eliminate it

The discussion should be completely revised and based not only on the new analyses but also on the concrete data obtained.

The references are too local and a major review of this aspect is needed as well.

 

Other points:

L48: this issue is well explained also in several papers (e.g., https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182539)

L76: What is meant by “Due to its ecological richness”?

LL88-89: What relict vegetation types?

Figure 2 is not informative.

LL204-208: discussion, this section should be moved from here.

L210: the results of NMDS need to be better presented: How much do the axes explain? What variables are they linked to? based on figure 4 it seems that there are no differences between the two conditions (but control is needed).

Figure 5: clay, silt, and sand are not related to grazing but to soil composition. what is the meaning of this analysis?

LL236-238: discussion, this section should be moved from here.

L265: the Shannon index is statistically significant in figure 3, this seems like a contradiction

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I'm not a native speaker, but English could be made more fluent

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3

Comments

1. Summary Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:

Comparison with control sites and methodology for distinguishing grazing intensities Reviewer's original comment: "Le point le plus critique concerne la comparaison de deux intensités de pâturage (sans définition de la méthodologie permettant de les distinguer), mais l'absence de comparaison avec les sites témoins, pourtant essentielle à la compréhension et à la discussion des résultats obtenus.

Response 1:

Thank you for raising this important methodological concern. These classification criteria were derived from a preliminary ecological survey (2021-2022) involving field observations, livestock census data, and structured interviews with local herders. This allowed reproducible distinction between grazing intensities based on spatial patterns of herd pressure and land use history.

Actually, no ungrazed reference sites (exclosures or protected plots) currently exist in the Jbel Bouhachem massif. This reflects the socio-ecological reality of the region, where traditional grazing is widespread, and no legally enforced grazing bans or fenced reserves are in place. While this is a limitation for assessing baseline ecological conditions, it is also a representative feature of Mediterranean rangelands under continuous human use. Regarding the distinction of grazing intensities, we have clarified in the Materials and Methods section that classification was based on livestock units per hectare (LU/ha), proximity to settlements, herd size per household, and the occurrence of seasonal transhumance. This typology was built using both quantitative field indicators and qualitative data obtained through local interviews. Finally, we now explicitly address the absence of ungrazed control sites as a limitation in the Discussion, and suggest that future studies prioritize the establishment of permanent exclosures to support more robust comparisons. Changes made in the manuscript:

• Section 2.2 – Grazing Characterization (page 4, lines 117-124): "Although this classification does not include ungrazed reference plots, it reflects the current socio-ecological realities of Bouhachem’s pastoral systems."
• Discussion, Section 4.1 – Final paragraph (page 11, lines 363-367): "A key limitation of this study is the absence of ungrazed control sites, which prevents comparison with fully protected conditions. This is due to the lack of exclosures or regulated grazing bans within the study area. Future research should aim to implement such controls to better evaluate the ecological baseline and the full spectrum of grazing impacts."

Comments 2:

Insufficiently described methods Reviewer's original comment: "The second issue concerns the methods, which are not sufficiently described and therefore not reproducible:

1. There is a reference to a classification of grazing intensity that has not yet been published (in preparation), and therefore cannot be consulted and cannot be accepted; please add this information.
2. Explain why the 1 m² plot was divided into 25 subplots or refer to a specific protocol; are you sure that the plot size is adequate to capture taxonomic diversity in Mediterranean grasslands?
3. Describe the soil analysis methods.
4. Describe the microbiological analysis methods.

Response 2:

Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. To address concerns regarding methodological clarity and reproducibility, we have expanded the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript. Specifically, we clarified the criteria used to classify grazing intensity based on empirical field data and interviews. We also justified the use of 1 m² quadrats and their subdivision into subplots using the minimal area method and a recognized ecological protocol. Furthermore, we detailed the laboratory procedures for soil and microbiological analyses, including specific methods and depths of sampling. These additions ensure transparency, methodological rigor, and allow for the reproducibility of our study in similar Mediterranean grassland ecosystems. Therefore, we have revised the methodology section to provide full details and ensure reproducibility. The following changes were made in the revised manuscript:

1. Justification for 1 m² quadrat and subplots:

Reviewer's specific comment: "Please explain why the 1 m² quadrat was used and why it was subdivided into 25 subplots. Are you sure that this size is adequate to capture the taxonomic diversity of Mediterranean grasslands? Please provide a justification or refer to a validated protocol."

Proposed response:

"Thank you for this relevant remark. We agree with the reviewer that it is important to clarify the choice and structure of the sampling unit. Therefore, we have justified the use of the 1 m² quadrat and its subdivision into 25 subplots. This information was added in Section 2.3 'Floristic Sampling Design' (page 4/5, lines 147-158), immediately after the sentence describing the 1 m² quadrat.

Updated text in the manuscript: 'The 1 m² quadrat size was determined based on the minimal area method, which identifies the smallest surface area needed to capture the representative plant diversity of a given vegetation type. This approach was validated through a preliminary field trial in spring 2022 and confirmed as suitable for semi-natural Mediterranean grasslands in the study area. To enhance resolution and detect fine-scale variability, each quadrat was subdivided into 25 subplots (20 × 20 cm).' This addition complements the paragraph already present in Section 2.3 describing the selection of homogeneous and heterogeneous sampling units across the eight grasslands. It reinforces the methodological robustness of our floristic data and ensures reproducibility by referencing a widely accepted ecological protocol."

Clarification of grazing intensity classification:

Reviewer's specific comment: "There is no description of how grazing intensity was defined. The manuscript refers to unpublished data, which is not acceptable. Please clarify the methodology used to classify grazing intensity." Proposed response: "Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have provided a clearer explanation of the methodology used to define and classify grazing intensity. This clarification has been added in Section 2.2 'Grazing Characterization' (page 5, lines 105-111), immediately after the sentence: '...number of animals per household, which directly influence pressure on ecological resources.' Updated text in the manuscript: 'These classification criteria were derived from a preliminary ecological survey conducted between 2021 and 2022, which involved field observations, livestock census data, and structured interviews with local herders. This allowed us to distinguish between moderately and intensively grazed grasslands in a reproducible manner, based on spatial patterns of herd pressure and land use history.' This added explanation reinforces the empirical basis of our grazing intensity categories and replaces the previously vague reference to 'unpublished data.' It also ensures consistency with the existing content of Section 2.2, which already details the livestock types, seasonal transhumance, and grazing patterns in the study area. The added paragraph does not introduce redundancy but rather fills a critical methodological gap as rightly noted by the reviewer."

Description of microbiological analysis methods:

Reviewer's specific comment: "Describe the microbiological analysis methods."

Proposed response:

"Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have improved the description of the microbiological analysis methods to make them clearer and more reproducible. This change has been made in the revised manuscript, Section 2.4.3 'Microbiological Analysis' (page 4/5, lines 177-193).

Updated text in the manuscript: 'Microbiological analyses were performed at the Biology and Health Laboratory of the Faculty of Sciences, Tetouan, using culture-based techniques to assess the abundance of key microbial groups. Soil suspensions were prepared by serial dilution in sterile saline solution (0.85% NaCl), followed by plating on selective media under sterile conditions:

• Total Aerobic Mesophilic Bacteria (TAM) were cultured on Nutrient Agar at 30 °C for 48 h.

1. Total Coliforms (TC) were grown on MacConkey Agar at 37 °C for 24 h.
2. Yeasts and Molds (Y&M) were incubated on Sabouraud Dextrose Agar at 25 °C for 3–5 days.

• Sulfite-Reducing Clostridia (SRC) were quantified using tryptose-sulfite-cycloserine agar under anaerobic conditions at 37 °C for 24–48 h. Colony-Forming Units (CFUs) were counted manually and expressed as log₁₀(CFU/g + 1) of dry soil to allow normalization and facilitate statistical comparisons.

Comments 3:

Illustration of grazing in the introduction (positive aspects) Reviewer's original comment: "In the introduction, the topic “grazing”, with all its ecological implications, should be illustrated (even just by focusing on the Mediterranean region); please include also the positive aspects.

" Proposed response :

Thank you for this valuable suggestion. We agree that the ecological implications of grazing, particularly within Mediterranean ecosystems, should be clarified. Therefore, we have added a paragraph in the Introduction (page 1, lines 30-46), after the sentence: 'pastoral systems are undergoing rapid change in both ecological and socio-economic dimensions.

Updated text in the manuscript: In Mediterranean landscapes, grazing plays a dual ecological role. On one hand, it can lead to vegetation degradation, loss of soil fertility, and biodiversity decline when overgrazing occurs. On the other hand, moderate grazing maintains open habitats, prevents shrub encroachment, and enhances plant diversity by generating microhabitat heterogeneity. According to Papanastasis et al. (2015), properly managed grazing is a key ecological process in Mediterranean rangelands, shaping landscape dynamics and sustaining traditional agro-silvo-pastoral systems.

Comments 4:

Results section subparagraphs Reviewer's original comment: "“In the results, the division into subparagraphs makes it difficult to understand the data, I would eliminate it.”"

Proposed response : "Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have revised the structure of the Results section by removing the subparagraph divisions in order to improve the clarity and readability of the data presentation. This change has been applied in the revised manuscript in the Results section (page 6, lines 224-344), where we have reorganized the content into a continuous and coherent narrative without internal subheadings."

Comments 5:

Discussion section revision Reviewer's original comment: "The discussion should be completely revised and based not only on the new analyses but also on the concrete data obtained."

Proposed response :

"Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have entirely revised the Discussion section to better reflect the concrete data obtained in our study and to integrate the results of the new analyses more clearly. The new version offers a more structured interpretation of the findings by closely aligning the arguments with observed patterns in species diversity, floristic composition, soil properties, and microbial responses. This revision has been implemented in Section 4 'Discussion' (page 13, lines 346-439). Each subsection (4.1 to 4.4) has been reformulated to improve scientific rigor and better contextualize the findings within existing literature.

Updated text in the manuscript : Discussion 4.1. Effects of Grazing Intensity on Species Richness and Floristic Diversity Although no statistically significant differences in species richness or Shannon diversity were detected between grazing intensities, a slight trend toward higher values under intensive grazing was observed. This tendency suggests that grazing may help limit the dominance of competitive species and foster coexistence among a broader range of plant taxa. These dynamics are well-documented in Mediterranean grasslands, where moderate to high grazing pressure can prevent competitive exclusion and sustain floristic diversity by enhancing spatial heterogeneity and generating disturbance-driven microhabitats [30,8,31]. This pattern is consistent with the concept of grazing-induced patchiness, which has been shown to promote diversity in low-input grasslands (Tonn et al., 2019). Consequently, our findings align with the intermediate disturbance hypothesis, whereby increased diversity under intense grazing reflects structural variability rather than improved ecological integrity. Importantly, no clear evidence was found for local extinctions due to overgrazing, which remains a marginal pressure in the massif. Nevertheless, the potential for long-term compositional shifts under cumulative disturbance cannot be ruled out. We thus recommend the establishment of biodiversity monitoring programs to assess the persistence and trajectories of these plant communities over time. The marked variability observed among sampled units, particularly in intensively grazed sites, highlights the influence of microenvironmental heterogeneity. Trampling, localized compaction, and soil moisture gradients likely shape the microsite conditions that drive community assembly. These results are consistent with previous studies [12,32] emphasizing the importance of fine-scale abiotic variation in maintaining species with differing ecological requirements in grazed landscapes. A key limitation of the present study lies in the absence of ungrazed control plots, which restricts direct comparisons with undisturbed baselines. This constraint stems from the lack of exclosures or formal grazing restrictions in the study area. Future work should prioritize the implementation of such reference sites to better evaluate the full gradient of grazing impacts.

Comments 6:
The references are too local and a major review of this aspect is needed as well.

Response 6:
Thank you for this observation. We agree that reference diversity is important. We wish to clarify that the majority of selected references were intentionally chosen because they specifically address studies conducted in Mediterranean grasslands, which aligns directly with our research context. These works provide essential insights into the unique ecological dynamics, management challenges, and conservation frameworks relevant to semi-natural grasslands under Mediterranean climatic and anthropogenic pressures.

For instance:

• Benabid (1984)and Fennane & Ibn Tattou (1999) offer foundational phytosociological data for North African Mediterranean grasslands.
• Vidaller et al. (2022), Noy-Meir et al. (1989), and Bakker et al. (2006)present cross-regional analyses of grazing impacts in Mediterranean ecosystems.
• Gatchui et al. (2014)and Mouhssine et al. (2024) address region-specific anthropogenic pressures (cannabis cultivation, soil degradation) prevalent in Mediterranean mountain contexts.

While we acknowledge the value of broader ecological references, the retained citations were prioritized for their:

1. Biogeographic relevance (Mediterranean basin ecoregions)
2. Methodological comparability (studies using analogous grazing-intensity frameworks)
3. Conservation applications (site-specific management strategies for protected areas)

This focused approach ensures our discussion remains anchored in empirically verified Mediterranean grassland ecology while addressing the reviewer's concern through explicit contextual justification. No changes to references have been made, as they collectively fulfill the criterion of "études sur les pelouses en méditerranées" central to our research scope.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have made significant changes to the manuscript. They have replaced all missing information and made the necessary additions. I recommend acceptance of the manuscript.

Author Response

ok i noted

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Despite the efforts made by the authors, some critical points have not been resolved: the lack of control and the division into only two (random) categories of grazing intensity are elements that have a very severe impact on the results of this study.

I have serious doubts, working on Mediterranean pastures, that 1 mq is the minimum surface area for a survey.

These methodological criticalities, together with the unresolved ones of the previous review, should be addressed.

Author Response

Reviewer Comment

“Despite the efforts made by the authors, some critical points have not been resolved: the lack of control and the division into only two (random) categories of grazing intensity are elements that have a very severe impact on the results of this study. I have serious doubts, working on Mediterranean pastures, that 1 m² is the minimum surface area for a survey. These methodological criticalities, together with the unresolved ones of the previous review, should be addressed.”

Authors Response

We thank the reviewer for these important observations, which have guided several clarifications and additions in the revised manuscript. We address each concern as follows:

1. Lack of ungrazed control plots:
   We fully acknowledge this limitation, which is now explicitly mentioned in the last paragraph of Section 4.1 (Discussion). Due to the long-standing and continuous nature of pastoralism in the Jbel Bouhachem massif, ungrazed reference grasslands were unavailable, and exclosure experiments were not feasible during the study period. As commonly practiced in Mediterranean rangeland systems, we adopted a gradient-based approach that reflects actual ecological and socio-pastoral conditions. This limitation is clearly stated, and we have proposed the future implementation of exclusion zones to enable more comprehensive assessments of grazing impacts.
2. Classification into two (random) grazing intensity categories:
   We clarify that the two-category classification (moderate and intensive) was not arbitrary, but based on a robust multi-source methodology:

• (i) Official livestock numbers for goats, sheep, and cattle were obtained from the 2021 vaccination registers of ONSSA (Office National de Sécurité Sanitaire des Produits Alimentaires), verified locally at the rural commune level;
• (ii) A GIS-based spatial analysis of village proximity to grasslands was conducted;
• (iii) Semi-structured interviews with local herders provided information on herd sizes, grazing frequency, and historical land use patterns.

From this triangulated dataset, grazing pressure was estimated in livestock units per hectare (LU/ha). Grasslands were then grouped into two distinct intensity levels, and this classification was empirically validated using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) performed on 19 abiotic and anthropozoogenic variables. The revised text in Section 2.3 clearly reflects this methodological rigour and the reproducibility of the classification.

3. Use of 1 m² quadrats as sampling unit:
   We have added clarification in Section 2.4.1 to address this concern. While we used 1 m² quadrats, we fully recognize that this size alone may not capture the entire floristic diversity of each grassland. Therefore, we adopted a mixed methodology:

• The 1 m² quadrat (divided into 25 sub-units) was used for quantitative frequency analysis, following standard Mediterranean grassland protocols (Braun-Blanquet, 1932);
• This was systematically complemented by visual surveys across each homogeneous unit to detect rare, localized, or low-frequency species that might not be captured in the quadrat.

In addition, a minimum area analysis was performed and confirmed that species richness plateaued at 6,400 cm² (0.64 m²), supporting the adequacy of the 1 m² quadrat as a base unit. These methodological choices are now clearly justified in the manuscript.

Updated Text in the Manuscript

Section 2.3 – Grazing Intensity Assessment and Classification:

“Grazing intensity was estimated in livestock units per hectare (LU/ha) based on the triangulation of three complementary data sources: (i) livestock counts (goats, sheep, cattle) obtained from the 2021 vaccination registers of ONSSA (Office National de Sécurité Sanitaire des Produits Alimentaires); (ii) GIS analysis of village proximity to grasslands; and (iii) semi-structured interviews with herders. Based on this assessment, grasslands were classified into two intensity levels (moderate and intensive), and this classification was validated using PCA and HCA applied to 19 abiotic and anthropozoogenic variables.”

Section 2.4.1 – Floristic Data Collection:

“Although 1 m² quadrats were used for floristic sampling, we are aware that this surface area alone may not capture all species present. Therefore, we applied a mixed approach: standardized quadrat sampling was systematically complemented by visual surveys across each homogeneous unit to detect rare or clustered species. A minimum area analysis confirmed that species richness reached an asymptote at 6,400 cm² (0.64 m²), supporting the use of 1 m² as a valid base unit.”

Section 4.1 – Discussion (final paragraph):

“A key limitation of the present study lies in the absence of ungrazed control plots, which restricts direct comparisons with undisturbed baselines. This constraint stems from the lack of exclosures or formal grazing restrictions in the study area. Future work should prioritize the implementation of such reference sites to better evaluate the full gradient of grazing impacts.”