Water Retention Capacity of Leaf Litter According to Field Lysimetry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Manuscript ID: forests-2238317

Type of manuscript: Article

Title: Water Retention Capacity of Leaf Litter According to Field Lysimetry

Authors: Taehyun Kim, Jungyoon Kim, Jeman Lee, Hyun Seok Kim, Juhan Park, Sangjun Im*

 

Dear authors

 

The manuscript entitled "Water Retention Capacity of Leaf Litter According to Field Lysimetry" has studied the water stored in the litter layer under natural conditions and to examine the effects of litter type and rainfall amount on the water balance of the litter layer using six lysimeters were placed in deciduous (Quercus acutissima) and coniferous (Pinus koraiensis) forests, and litter weight was measured during the experimental period and to estimate water retention capacity. Statistical analyses have done. Results showed the retained water were 1.82 mm and 3.20 mm per unit mass of Q. acutissima and P. koraiensis litter, respectively, immediately after the cessation of rainfall. Results revealed that the remaining water adhered to the litter was estimated to be 1.66±1.72 mm and 2.91±3.14 mm per unit mass per rainfall event for Q. acutissima and P. koraiensis litter, respectively, after the gravitational flow had entirely drained. Authors concluded that the 83.6% and 84.4% of incident rainfall drained into the uppermost soil layer below the Q. acutissima litter and P. koraiensis litter, respectively.

Generally, the quality of manuscript is well written and suitable. The subject of the research work is original and has been able to provide a lot of new information in the field of water retention capacity and the water dynamics of the litter layer. The authors were able to answer the research questions due to the review of suitable sources, the study method of the region and the sufficient number of samples, and there is no need for additional items in the method and also other controls. The authors were able to match the research conclusions well with the evidence and arguments presented and address the main question raised. References were well presented and good previous researches were listed, however, some related references proposed that should be mentioned in the manuscript. Tables and figures are well organized and logically consistent with the content of the text.

The study design is robust and the topic fits well to the scope of the journal. The manuscript is generally clearly designed, written and illustrated. The discussion of the manuscript also well written. I recommend this paper for addressing some major concerns presented on the PDF file.

 

Best regards

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In MS entitled, Water Retention Capacity of Leaf Litter According to Field Lysimetry, Lysimetry used to study the water retention capacity of forest leaf litter. The results revealed that Pinus koraiensis litter stored more water during rainfall periods than did Quercus acutissima litter. The measurements were short-term and did not show any significant difference between the physical traits of the litter. Authors have stated that in the future, the studies on fungal and soil fauna activity on litter must be studied for further insights. The results of the study are significant but overall MS has certain flaws which need to be addressed as follows:

Abstract- mention conclusion based on the results.

Mention the objectives of the study at the end of the introduction.

In the Introduction, add the significance of leaf litter and water retention capacity.

Instead of 2.4. Analysis of differences among treatments. write 2.4 Statistical analysis. Also, write about experimental design, data measurement, number of replicates, and values represented as (Mean ± S.D.).

In 3.1. Water retention capacity of leaf litter- standard deviation is too high. Mention the number of replicates taken.

L244 average values of minimum retention were 1.66±1.72 mm and 243 2.91±3.14 mm. How SD value is higher than the measured value? Check calculations again.

What are 1.1 days? Mention in hours also.

Discuss the difference between traditional methods of water retention measurement and Litter lysimeter measurements.

L421-426 can be shifted to the introduction/discussion.

Delete results from the conclusion. Write a conclusion based on the experimental results.

Add a few lines about future applications of this study.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

 

Manuscript ID: forests-2238317

Type of manuscript: Article

Title: Water Retention Capacity of Leaf Litter According to Field Lysimetry

Authors: Taehyun Kim, Jungyoon Kim, Jeman Lee, Hyun Seok Kim, Juhan Park, Sangjun Im*

 

Dear authors 

The authors made the corrections completely that I requested and now the article seems to be significantly improved. Therefore, in this form, I positively recommend to publish this manuscript.

 

Best regards

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed all the comments.