Variation of soil organic carbon, stable isotopes, and soil quality indicators across an erosion–deposition catena in a historical Spanish olive orchard

Gómez, José A.; Guzmán, Gema; Toloza, Arsenio; Resch, Christian; García-Ruíz, Roberto; Mabit, Lionel

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-6-179-2020

Articles | Volume 6, issue 1

https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-6-179-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-6-179-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 6, issue 1

Original research article

|

15 May 2020

Original research article |

| 15 May 2020

Variation of soil organic carbon, stable isotopes, and soil quality indicators across an erosion–deposition catena in a historical Spanish olive orchard

José A. Gómez, Gema Guzmán, Arsenio Toloza, Christian Resch, Roberto García-Ruíz, and Lionel Mabit

Download

Final revised paper (published on 15 May 2020)
Preprint (discussion started on 09 Oct 2019)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Referee Comments for SOIL-2019-59', Anonymous Referee #1, 29 Nov 2019
- AC1: 'Answer to comments on manuscript by R1', Jose Alfonso Gomez, 20 Dec 2019
RC2: 'Comments on the Discussion paper soil-2019-59', Anonymous Referee #2, 03 Dec 2019
- AC2: 'Answer to comments on manuscript by R2', Jose Alfonso Gomez, 20 Dec 2019
RC3: 'soil-2019-59', Anonymous Referee #3, 03 Dec 2019
- AC3: 'Answer to comments on manuscript by R3', Jose Alfonso Gomez, 20 Dec 2019

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (12 Jan 2020) by Olivier Evrard

AR by Jose Alfonso Gomez on behalf of the Authors (03 Mar 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (03 Mar 2020) by Olivier Evrard

AR by Jose Alfonso Gomez on behalf of the Authors (04 Mar 2020)

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (12 Mar 2020) by Olivier Evrard

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (14 Mar 2020)

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (24 Mar 2020)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

The authors have made revisions of the manuscript accordingly to the comments and suggestions in the previous review. However, please find below some remaining suggestions that I recommend the Authors to take into account:

Line 24 Maintain the differentiation between non-degraded vs degraded, it is unclear for me in terms of soil processes. Please reconsider: eroded vs depositional sites (see line 246)
Line 29 Particularly, research on the sequestration of carbon in soils and the potential of agricultural soils to store carbon has increased
Line 83 the local reference 137Cs inventory calculated was 1925 … instead of the initial 13çCs fallout
Line 93 References of these previous studies or information
Line 113 establishment of a reference site. ‘values for undisturbed soil’ could be deleted
The meaning of this sentence is unclear. Consider rewriting ‘the reference area (Figure 1) which had been established in 1856’ or link with information in line 120
Line 121 where neither erosion nor sedimentation occurs (remove excluded from any soil disturbance)
Line 122 criterion to exclude 9 sampling point or select only 4 sampling points
Line 124 (i.e. 0–5, 5–10, 10–15, 15–20 and when possible, 20–25, 25–30, 30–35, 35–40, 40–45, 45–50, 50–55 and 55–60 cm). delete and state clearly in line 124 that soil profiles were sectioned or divided at 5 cm depth intervals till bedrock as reached variying between 20 -60 cm?
Line 140 – 141 Please clarify in the present form this sentence is unclear
Line 177 BD is soil fraction <2 mm / Volume soil fraction <2 mm?
Line 198 include p value. Revise in the whole manuscript (e.g line 242)
Line 226 changes in clay, silt and sand contents …
Line 253 revise r=0.742
Lines 358-359 This sentence is unclear

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (25 Mar 2020) by Olivier Evrard

AR by Jose Alfonso Gomez on behalf of the Authors (26 Mar 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (02 Apr 2020) by Olivier Evrard

AR by Jose Alfonso Gomez on behalf of the Authors (04 Apr 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (07 Apr 2020) by Olivier Evrard

ED: Publish as is (15 Apr 2020) by Kristof Van Oost (Executive editor)

AR by Jose Alfonso Gomez on behalf of the Authors (15 Apr 2020) Manuscript

Short summary

The long-term evolution of soil organic carbon in an olive orchard (planted in 1856) was evaluated and compared to an adjacent undisturbed natural area. Total soil organic carbon in the top 40 cm of the soil in the orchard was reduced to 25 % of that in the undisturbed area. The deposition downslope in the orchard of sediment coming from the eroded upslope area did not increase the accumulation of organic carbon in soil, but it quadrupled available phosphorus and improved overall soil quality.