the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Ecosystem characteristics of land covers with various anthropogenic impacts in a tropical forest region of Southeast Asia
Abstract. Given the severe anthropogenic pressure on tropical forests and the high demand for field observations of ecosystem characteristics, it is crucial to collect such data both in pristine tropical forests and in the converted deforested land cover classes. To gain insight into the ecosystem characteristics of pristine tropical forests, regrowth forests, and cashew plantations, we established an ecosystem monitoring site in Phnom Kulen National Park, Cambodia. Here, we present observed datasets of forest inventories, leaf area index, leaf traits of woody species, a fraction of intercepted photosynthetically active radiation, and edaphic and meteorological conditions. We examined how land-use and land-cover change affect species and functional diversity, stand structure, and edaphic conditions among the three land-cover classes. We further investigated relationships between diameters at breast height and tree height, estimated aboveground biomass (AGB), and explored relationships between ecosystem characteristics and AGB. We uncovered some key differences in ecosystem characteristics among the land-cover classes. We also demonstrated the feasibility of locally updating AGB estimates using power law functions. These datasets and findings can contribute to filling data gaps in tropical forest research, addressing global environmental challenges, and supporting sustainable forest management.
- Preprint
(2199 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(3474 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 31 Jul 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-98', Anonymous Referee #1, 03 Jul 2024
reply
This study provides observed datasets of meteorological conditions, forest inventory, leaf traits of woody species, leaf area index (LAI) and a fraction of photosynthetically active radiation (fPAR) of pristine tropical forests, regrowth forests, and cashew plantations within Phnom Kulen National Park. Nine forest plots were selected and these forest inventory results cover the period from Apr 2022 to Apr 2023. The authors compared the differences in these ecosystem characteristics among the three types of land-cover classes and provided a well-organized dataset of a tropical forest ecosystem. However, despite the hard monitoring work, I am not quite sure whether this dataset is valuable enough to reach the high standard of ESSD.
Major concern
This study compared the species diversity, leaf functional traits, biomass, and other characteristics of three types of forests. I doubt whether this dataset is unique and useful enough. Does the comparison of these indexes among three types of forests can provide us with any new insights that haven’t been investigated before? The authors claimed that this dataset fills data gaps in tropical forest research, so does it mean there were few studies investigating the ecosystem characteristics in tropical forests? I cannot see any new findings according to the data analysis section.
Three methods were used to calculate aboveground biomass, and the selection of the method can cause a large difference in the calculated results. How to prove which method is better than the other two as the authors claimed in the discussion 4.5.4?
Minor
The journal required a data link at the end of the abstract.
Please add the background of land cover map in Figure 1.
The titles of these tables are too long. Please move the note to the end of the table.
Authors in Table 1 is not a good representation of reference. Just use “reference”.
What is the difference in precipitation and temperature data between Figs. 2 and 3? Are they repeated results?
In Fig. 4, does the small plot represent the local amplifier of the plot outside? The green line seems different among the two plots.
Hard to distinguish the line form of AGBh and AGBf in Figure 5a.
Line 383-384. I doubt the dataset in this study can be used to investigate the effect of land use change from natural land to settlement areas. The land use change is a process, and it is not reflected in this dataset with a short period.
Line 400. Please add the supporting figures or table numbers.
Several figures in the supplementary were not cited in the main text, please check.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-98-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
382 | 74 | 30 | 486 | 37 | 25 | 31 |
- HTML: 382
- PDF: 74
- XML: 30
- Total: 486
- Supplement: 37
- BibTeX: 25
- EndNote: 31
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1