PONE-D-23-07720Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. berihun,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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. After the editorial evaluation, the MS was sent to two expert reviewers. Both the reviewers have suggested significant revision in terms of technicality, data analysis, presentation style, and English language. Please look into the comments very carefully and revised the MS thoroughly. Major part of the MS needs rewriting, and through correction of English is a must. The revised version will be sent for external reviews once again, before making the decision on the MS.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 02 2023 11:59PM. If you need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bhoj Kumar Acharya, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. 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.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

“The authors thank Dilla University for giving the first author the opportunity to continue his doctoral studies. Funding from Dilla University and Addis Ababa University is also recognized. We would also like to thank the Diga District Department of Agriculture for providing the necessary information for this study. We also thank all the staff of the Ethiopian National Herbarium for their assistance in identifying the flora. We would also like to express our gratitude to the local authorities and community for their kind support and cooperation throughout the data collection”

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

6. We note that you have referenced (Hadera, G., A study on the ecology and management of the Dessa forest in the northeastern escarpment of Ethiopia. Unpublished MSc Thesis Addis Ababa University, 2000.) which has currently not yet been accepted for publication. Please remove this from your References and amend this to state in the body of your manuscript: (ie “Bewick et al. [Unpublished]”) as detailed online in our guide for authors

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-reference-style

7. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

8. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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: Yes

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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: Yes

**********

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: The work conducted by the authors is appreciated. However, the current draft of the manuscript is lacking the standards of the journal and it looks prepared in hurried manner. Number of typos are clearly visible throughout the submitted manuscript daft, a few of them are marked in the attached manuscript draft. Most of figures does not possess figure legends. The manuscript needs a major revision in terms of its presentation, prior to its consideration for the publication by the journal.

Thank you

Reviewer #2: The MS is interesting and readable but it needs to be improved. I have provided report in the attachment. I suggest do some regression analysis with elevation data and draw the pattern.

Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.

The present MS is about a unique type of study made by four Ethiopian authors. They focus on community analysis along 106 environmental gradients and seek to assess the impact of environmental factors on plant diversity (i.e., richness, diversity and evenness). The MS seems interesting and worth-full to read as well as I enjoyed reading it. The data have been collected by authors by sampling which add more value on the MS. This sort data base may add credit to define species diversity and composition theory in the field of ecology.

Beside this I found some weak points. The major weakness of the study is not focused well as per the aims of the study. When one going for studies the MS he or she may confuse whether it is local scale study or macro scale study. The Arjo-Diga forests have elevations gradients ranging from 1,200 to 2,220 meters above sea level and I ask the authors to show the patterns along the elevation gradient as well?

However, there are some more flaws in the MS which needs to be improved before publication of the MS. I have jotted down some of the flaws in the MS as below:

Abstract:

The abstract is relatively longer and it confusing so I suggest to rephrase it.

Introduction:

The study has two types of data set like elevation gradient which is macro scale factor and soil, disturbance etc are local scale factors so the authors have to discuss about these factors how they influence the species patterns. So they have to demonstrate how these factors are associated in their study.

Methodology

The Arjo-Diga has elevations ranging from 1,200 to 2,220 meters above sea level which quite long gradient so I suggest honoring this gradient. Why authors use DCA and CCA have to elaborate why this data set suitable to use these techniques. They have not provided DCA and CCA diagram and their interpretation.

Others part of methodology is okey.

Result:

The authors have identified 5 types of plant communities I still want to see these communities in the ordination diagram. So I want to ask to make CCA diagram how these five types of communities distributed?

Discussion

I am skeptical with the presentation of discussion. The subtopics which are provided are vague so I want to see discussion under the specific subheading like: relationship between species diversity and climatic variables or relationship between species composition and environmental factors etc…. and how their finding is similar or difference with others such studies in the different scales in the Ehiopia and other parts of Globe.

Conclusions

The conclusion rephrased as it is bit confusing!

In conclusion I found the MS is interesting but it still needs to be revised thoroughly.

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Khem Raj Bhattarai

**********

[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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-23-07720.pdf

Attachment

Submitted filename: Comment for authors-Report.docx

PONE-D-23-07720R1Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Berihun,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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. The revised version was reviewed by three experts (earlier two reviewers and one additional reviewer). All of them have positively commented on the MS but  there are few important aspects that need further improvement. Reviewer 3 have given some useful comments for improvement, and hence, authors are requested to critically look into the comments and revise the MS carefully. Please also look for typos, grammar, formats (including maps, figures and tables) as well as uniformity in presentation. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 29 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bhoj Kumar Acharya, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE 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: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. 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: The revised manuscript looks in good shape and authors have adequately addressed endorsements in the manuscript.

A small correction needs to be incorporated in the manuscript.

Instead to A study by [7] found different patterns of species richness along different elevation gradients.

authors should write A study by Pandey et al [7] found different patterns of species richness along different elevation gradients.

Rest is Ok.

With Best Regards

Reviewer #2: The MS has been improved but I am still skeptical with MAP showing the location of Ethiopia in the Africa.

Reviewer #3: The study titled "Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia" aims to examine three critical points.

(1) the floristic composition and diversity of the Arjo Diga forest,

(2) the influence of environmental variables on the characteristics of plant diversity

(Richness, variety, and uniformity)

(3) Investigate the relationship between plant community types and environmental variables.

Such a kind of study, especially from the underrepresented areas, is essential and requires our attention. This manuscript has valuable finding which is vital for protecting existing plant species in the Arjo-Diga forest in Western Ethiopia.

The authors have put a reasonable effort into addressing reviewers' comments; however, there is a scope to make more corrections, which can be quickly addressed and will improve the manuscript's readability. The discussion sections require some improvements.

While revising, please be careful of typos; I have highlighted some of them. Also, edit the tables and figures following a similar format throughout the manuscript.

Here are my detailed comments.

Abstract:

L17-18, The plant family information is in between sentences, which discusses plant communities. The author can start with plant families, followed by another sentence about plant communities or vice versa.

Introduction:

The full form of TN and CEC needs to be included in the introduction.

L72-77 It would be nice if author could provide references for the following sentences

Materials and Methods

L113 Here, the author may introduce meters above sea level abbreviation as (m.a.s.l.), which can be used for the rest of the sections.

Throughout this section, authors can cite the references directly instead of using according to ……

Ethical statement

Although it is an important point, I am unsure if the ethical statement must be a part of the methodology section.

If it is only about the permits/permission the authors required for the sample collection, this will fit well in the acknowledgements.

Methods of data collection

L162: Use abbreviations (m.a.s.l.)

L165: Does it mean that out of 72 plots, a single plot size was 30 m x 30 m (900 m2) and inside each such plots authors also laid 5 m x 5 m (25 m2) and five 2 m x 2 m (4 m2) to record other life forms such as shrubs and herbs? If it is so, then it needs to be rewritten. Also, unlike herbs, how many 5 m x 5 m (25 m2) were laid in each plot needs to be clearly mentioned.

L169: Does it mean that voucher specimens per species were collected from all plots for unidentified/identified species?

Environmental Data

L179: Won’t the soil samples be more than 72? If it is collected from five different locations at each 1 m x 1 m subplot. Please clarify.

L181 airdried in natural conditions? Or a hot air oven?

L184 The full form and abbreviations of TN and CEC should be mentioned in the introduction.

L191-194: It will be easier for a reader to understand the methodology if we give more information than just citing previous papers. The scale looks interesting, but it will be more apparent if the authors briefly describe the signs of disturbance that were considered for data collection. For example, the presence or absence of cattle dung? Proximity to the forests?

Also, reading the discussion, human-caused disturbance is one of the major causes of species loss, so adding more information to this section would be worthwhile.

Results

Table 2: Having the full form of the floristics regions in the caption will be good.

Also, were any of these species endemic? Will it be possible to add a row showing whether these are endemic? Ignore this comment if endemic species are listed elsewhere in another table.

L266: Package information and its reference must be mentioned in the methods/analysis section, not the results section.

L370: Delete however and use while to connect both the sentences

L373 attitude?

L375 axes are 0.3504 and 0.2346 ….. follow the similar no of digits after

the decimal points for the entire manuscript.

Table 7 Altitude (m a s l) needs to be replaced with m.a.s.l.

Also, the row title is in bold, while the rest of the tables are not; please follow the same formatting style.

The current file shows all the figures as Fig 1, which needs to be clarified. Is it the formatting issue?

Kindly have a look at it and make the required changes.

Fig - Dendrogram of vegetation data from agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis-

In this figure, the legend and the caption for the y and x axes need a larger font size; it is now difficult to read.

Fig- Regression analysis along altitude, slope, TN, and disturbance.. Species richness ----- For this figure, the significance can be mentioned

at a similar location for all figures, towards the bottom right or top right. That will make the figure look clean and easy to read. Furthermore, please follow similar width and breadth sizes for all the figures.

Fig 1. Influence of environmental variables on plant community types- here, please mention the plant community types.

Discussion

The first paragraph of the discussion should help the reader recollect your aims or the questions addressed, followed by the data used and the results found. Overall, the first paragraph of the discussion sections will lead to the remaining section of the discussion. I wonder if the comparison with the other forests at the beginning of the discussion makes any sense. It distracts the readers from the main questions.

Either remove it or reshuffle the flow of this section.

**********

7. 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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Dr. Aseesh Pandey

Reviewer #2: Yes: Khem Raj Bhattarai

Reviewer #3: Yes: SHWETA BASNETT

**********

[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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: Comments_Sep_23.docx

PONE-D-23-07720R2Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Berihun,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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. The MS is significantly improved compared to previous version but still there are issues that needs to be addressed. Please look into the comments of Reviewer 2 on Map of the study area and all the comments of Reviewer 3. Revise the MS carefully and critically based on the comments. Please look into English Grammar, Typos and formatting of text as well as tables and figures. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 09 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bhoj Kumar Acharya, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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

[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.

PONE-D-23-07720R3Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Berihun,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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. The MS is improved compared to previous version but still there are series of issues. Please look into comments from the editor in the attached MS. Please look into the comments thoroughly and revise the MS. Although the MS has undergone several rounds of review but many of the comments are still not addressed. Hence, this is the last chance for revision, and if the MS is not carefully revised there may be a possibility of rejection without further review.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 01 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bhoj Kumar Acharya, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments: 

The MS is improved compared to previous version but still there are series of issues. Please look into comments in the attached MS. Please look into the comments thoroughly and revise the MS. Although the MS has undergone several rounds of review but many of the comments are still not addressed. Hence, this is the last chance for revision, and if the MS is not carefully revised there may be a possibility of rejection without further review.

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

[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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-23-07720_R3_Editor Comments.pdf

PONE-D-23-07720R4Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Berihun,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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.

This MS has undergone four rounds of revision but still some of the concerns has not been addressed well. Please look into the comments from one reviewer in this round of review and revise the MS accordingly. Additionally, my earlier comments on reference citation pattern and English language has been addressed partially only. I noticed that there are lots of problems with reference citation pattern and English language (especially in the discussion section). Kindly look them thoroughly, and make a critical revision. Hope authors carefully look into the entire MS, and improve the content in this round of revision.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 12 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bhoj K. Acharya, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #4: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #4: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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 #4: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE 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 #4: No

**********

6. 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 #4: Now submitted the comments, need to wait for the authors response. Objectives need to be clearly defined, further for association studied simple multiple regression could be used. The manuscripts need lots of revision to make the message clear and results needs to be arranged accordingly. Statistical analysis are fine but methodology needs to be elaborated. Data on tree density, volume, and other information could be made available to assess the dominance in a community. There is a lot of scope for improvement and presentation of data in the manuscripts.

**********

7. 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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #4: Yes: BHAUSAHEB TAMBAT

**********

[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.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: Tambat_Suggestions_PONE-D-23-07720R4.docx

Topography factors and soil variables drive the plant community distribution pattern and species richness in the Arjo Diga forest in western Ethiopia.

PONE-D-23-07720R5

Dear Dr. Berihun,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

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 onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Prof. Bhoj K. Acharya

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

The authors have successfully revised the MS now but still there are issues with reference citation which needs to be solved.

For example:

L449: lower than that reported by [51] in the Bonga forest- You should write the name of the authors and then only you have to cite 51 in bracket

L451-452:  A study by[52] revealed that forests subjected: You should write the name of the authors and then only you have to cite 52 in bracket

Such issues are there in introduction, methodology and everywhere in the MS. Please check thoroughly while submitting final files to the journal.

Reviewers' comments: