Use of Random Forest Model to Identify the Relationships among Vegetative Species, Salt Marsh Soil Properties, and Interstitial Water along the Atlantic Coast of Georgia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Infrastructures-1203009-Use of Random Forest Model to identify the relationships among vegetative species, salt march soil properties, and interstitial waster along the Atlantic coast of Georgia.

 

General comments

The manuscript attempts to identify numerous relationships between vegetative species and a wide range to saltmarsh characteristics. The key characteristics considered include soil particle size distribution, soil composition, moisture content, organic matter, salinity, pH and Redox. The patterns are rather meshed, and the strongest trends were not always obvious. However, the authors have made a reasonable attempt at highlighting areas where common trends were deemed strongest. In this regard, the authors have successfully made helpful trends, with illustrations that would guide engineers towards more successful restoration in disturbed tidal saltmarshes.

Notwithstanding the successes mentioned above, the authors could however have made further progress in contribution, by producing a nomograph that would group the trends in a roadmap of the best combinations of saltmarsh characteristics for best vegetative results. Such a nomograph would have been a better end tool to guide engineers, obviating the need to rely on the individual illustrations that have been presented by the authors. The nomograph is more useful and a long-lasting legacy of the authors as a design tool in practice worldwide.

 

Specific comments

• Page 3, lines 88-92. Superscripts need to be effected on the density units.
• Table 1. It is recommended that the authors consider enhancing site separation such that the different site locations are more clearly separated. For example, the horizontal lines could be applied after every ABC rather than after every entry.

Author Response

Please see the attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper deals with field and laboratory tests on soil samples from eight different saltmarsh sites in the southeastern US Atlantic coast, followed by the development of a random forest model, to identify correlation among saltmarsh predominant vegetation types, redox potential, and salinity.

The research design appears appropriate and methods are described with enough clearness.

The decleared practical application, which should be identifying desirable saltmarsh soil/water properties for re-establishing vegetative cover with the reduced time after construction activities, is not clearly evident from the conclusions. This aspect reduces the innovation attractiveness of the paper.

Detailed comments are reported in the attached annotated copy.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The article covers the topic of the Use of Random Forest Model to Identify the Relationships  Among Vegetative Species, Salt Marsh Soil Properties, and Interstitial Water Along the Atlantic coast of Georgia. 
In my opinion, article presents valuable content. 
The subject and the supporting experiments are informative and present added value to the body of knowledge on the subject area. The manuscript has acceptable cohesion. In my opinion, the authors have achieved to provide interesting research work. 

Some minor remarks:
1. I suggest to add separated point 2 - Research significance - Please descibe here the main essence of the research. (Why presented
paper is so important? What is major innovation accent in presented studies?).
2. I suggest to add one more keyword at the first position: 'Random Forest Model'
3. I suggest to avoid shortcut in the text ex. line  259 'doesn’t show', please change to does not show.
4. It is recommended to indicate potential application of research results in engineering.
5. I suggest that conclusions should be presented point by point.

Author Response

Please see the attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.