|This paper shows great efforts by the authors to analyse soil temperature and thermal conductivity affected by quartz contents and a high variation of the climatic conditions during the year.|
In this paper, a topic related to soil and climate sciences are worked in France (21 meteorological stations). However, the introduction is very short with not actual and relevant bibliography, the methods did not present clear concepts or tools about soil properties in this land degraded area (it suppose that it is degraded or this topic is important), the study area was not good explained and, therefore in my opinion, it is impossible to do a discussion (without any cites!) of the results. Without clear information about the methods, how can I good interpret the data?
The results are not clears to support the interpretation and conclusions, because it seems a recompilation of climate and pedological data and directly exposed in the text, with parametric models (also without citations).
The authors should work more in the discussion and to clear the applied methods. The description of the methods (soil collected samples, soil analysis, data collecting are not clear for me, because they are not described in the text).
Firstly, I suggest general comments and finally, attached in the pdf, authors can observe some appreciations to improve and to reach, in my opinion, a greater scientific level of this research. Sorry for the review, but I must be clear and objective with my perception. I hope the author can follow and understand the suggestions (if you considerer).
1) Title: I find the title very clear and precise. But any information about the applied models.
2) Abstract: It needs a couple of sentences about the general focus of the topic. There aren´t any explanation about where is developed the work and the aims. The English is not too correct (sentences too longs… also in the rest).
3) Introduction: Please, the authors must include more actual bibliography. Almost all literature is old and there are a lot of affirmation without citations… cite please! This action will make your paper more interesting and relevant. Actually, the scientific language in English is not correct for me. The most important lack of the introduction is the information related to the grass, the importance of these measurements in your region. This kind of soils are specific from your region (?) and the readers need some pictures (soil profiles, general chemical and physical properties...), information and actual problematic (grass, agriculture, urbanisation...)… Finally, the aims of this work aren´t clear, please, make a concrete paragraph only with the goals: i)…; ii)…; iii)…
4) Methods: Methods, study areas, climatic analysis… they are exposed really confuse. There are a lot of equation (and more in supplementary materials!). Maybe you can reduce this part. Any equation, any model had citation… all is new? If yes, please explain it.
The description of the study area is difficult to understand. Better, I recommend: Study area: 1) first group with some areas 2) second group with some areas 3) third group with some areas … with soil properties, land uses, geology and climatic patterns. Now, a lot of information is repeated and has any correct order. Why do you put only one graphic about one station?
Please, attach more information about the study area in your map and tables.
When you classify the soils where your study areas are situated, you can use actual and international “soil classifications”, which all authors around the world can understand: USDA (2010) or FAO-WRB (2014).
5) Results: Please, the tables are too big and there is a lot of information without explanations (the same for the graphics). Figures have all different types of letters, colours… the resolution is really low (I cannot increase the zoom to read one part of the graphic). Maybe, authors should be considered the possibility to cut some graphics. I´m sure that the authors have really amazing information and they can show the scientific community of soil sciences with only concrete numbers, graphics and some statistical analysis your results.
6) Discussion: Please, put more attention in the author guidelines with the information about what is it a discussion. You should make a comparison between your results and others from different authors, and discuss methods, results and ideas. You need bibliography.