PCLM-D-25-00058

Diversity of woody species and carbon stock potential in Orthodox Church Forests in Gamo Zone, Southern Ethiopia

PLOS Climate

Dear Dr. Yabsra Melak Sitotie,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Climate. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Climate’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 30 April 2025. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at climate@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pclm/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Irfan Ashraf, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS Climate

Journal Requirements:

1. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

2. Please provide separate figure files in .tif or .eps format.

For more information about figure files please see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/climate/s/figures

https://journals.plos.org/climate/s/figures#loc-file-requirements

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that “Data is available at any time to request me”

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either

a. In a public repository,

b. Within the manuscript itself, or

c. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons by return email and your exemption request will be escalated to the editor for approval. Your exemption request will be handled independently and will not hold up the peer review process, but will need to be resolved should your manuscript be accepted for publication. One of the Editorial team will then be in touch if there are any issues.

3. Figure 1: please (a) provide a direct link to the base layer of the map (i.e., the country or region border shape) and ensure this is also included in the figure legend; and (b) provide a link to the terms of use / license information for the base layer image or shapefile. We cannot publish proprietary or copyrighted maps (e.g. Google Maps, Mapquest) and the terms of use for your map base layer must be compatible with our CC-BY 4.0 license.

Note: if you created the map in a software program like R or ArcGIS, please locate and indicate the source of the basemap shapefile onto which data has been plotted.

If your map was obtained from a copyrighted source please amend the figure so that the base map used is from an openly available source. Alternatively, please provide explicit written permission from the copyright holder granting you the right to publish the material under our CC-BY 4.0 license.

Please note that the following CC BY licenses are compatible with PLOS license: CC BY 4.0, CC BY 2.0 and CC BY 3.0, meanwhile such licenses as CC BY-ND 3.0 and others are not compatible due to additional restrictions.

If you are unsure whether you can use a map or not, please do reach out and we will be able to help you. The following websites are good examples of where you can source open access or public domain maps:

* U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - All maps are in the public domain. (http://www.usgs.gov)

* PlaniGlobe - All maps are published under a Creative Commons license so please cite “PlaniGlobe, http://www.planiglobe.com, CC BY 2.0” in the image credit after the caption. (http://www.planiglobe.com/?lang=enl)

* Natural Earth - All maps are public domain. (http://www.naturalearthdata.com/about/terms-of-use/)

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

The article focuses on the assessment of forest biodiversity, a significant and timely topic. However, it requires substantial revisions and improvements, as highlighted by both reviewers. These include enhancements in language quality, resolution of methodological concerns, and more robust statistical analysis.

The manuscript may be considered for publication pending the recommended major revisions.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

-->Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Climate’s publication criteria ? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

-->2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

-->3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

-->4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Climate does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

-->5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)-->

Reviewer #1: Authors, my comments on the manuscript are as follows:

The abstract is not the standard guideline and needs to be revised as background, objectives, goals, methodology, results, and conclusion.

The highlight needs to be rewritten given the emphasis on the results of the study.

The introduction of the manuscript needs to improve by adding research gaps and recent literature related to the study.

The hypothesis and objective of the study are not as per the requirements and need to improve these two in the manuscript.

The DBH measured at 13 m or 1.3 m; please correct it.

Reference Mensah et al. 2020 used for estimation of forest structure are not appropriate please change it.

Please remove all the formulas for the estimation of frequency, density, and dominance, because all these are well-established in ecological study.

The scientific names are not italics in the manuscript; please do the needful.

The results need to improve by including the data. Citations in the results need to be removed.

The discussion of the manuscript is written very poorly and needs improvement.

Reviewer #2: Dear Editor

Thank you for inviting me to review the manuscript entitled *"Investigating the Impact of Age on Woody Species Diversity and Carbon Storage Potential in Orthodox Church Forests of Gamo Zone, Ethiopia). Below is my assessment:

Overall Evaluation

While the study addresses an ecologically significant topic, the manuscript in its current form does not meet the journal's publication standards due to:

1. Language Quality: Requires extensive editing by a native English speaker.

2. Methodological Issues:

- Unconventional DBH measurement protocol (13m height)

- Incomplete site descriptions (climate, vegetation, land use)

- Inadequate statistical analyses (e.g., lack of two-way ANOVA)

3. Analytical Shortcomings:

- Absence of key comparative analyses (e.g., Venn diagrams for species composition)

- Purely descriptive presentation of diversity indices

4. Interpretation Limitations:

- Superficial discussion with minimal literature integration

- Unsubstantiated claims (e.g., "11% land coverage")

Recommendation

I recommend rejection in the current form but would welcome a resubmission should the authors address these fundamental concerns through major revisions.

**********

-->6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Diversity of woody species and carbon stock potential in Orthodox Church Forests in Gamo Zone, Southern Ethiopia

PCLM-D-25-00058R1

Dear Yabsra Melak Sitotie,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Diversity of woody species and carbon stock potential in Orthodox Church Forests in Gamo Zone, Southern Ethiopia' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Climate.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow-up email from a member of our team. 

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact climate@plos.org.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Climate.

Best regards,

Muhammad Irfan Ashraf, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS Climate

***********************************************************

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Thank you for understanding the reviewers' comments and making revisions accordingly. Your article is accepted in its current form, subject to fulfilling the editorial and formatting requirements of the journal.

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):