Late Roman Forest in the Delta of the River Po (Italy): Remote Sensing and 3D Maps Computation for Palaeoenvironmental Reconstruction

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

A very interesting paper, for the application, for the very clear structure and for the results found.

I only prefer to suggest to change the title.

I would delete the word geocomputation in the title, too general and I would substitute it with some more specific technique used in the paper, such as 3d maps computation or similar.

Apart from that the paper is already ready to be published.

Author Response

Dear Colleague,

thanks for reviewing my work.
I am glad that you consider it is a very interesting research.
I welcome the suggestion for changing the title, certainly more suitable, inserting "3D map computation".
A second reviewer asked for some changes especially in relation to the use of Latin. I proceeded to insert the required translations.

Thanks for collaboration!

The author

Reviewer 2 Report

Line 12-13: rephrase, “testify” doesn’t sound to be the correct word. Maybe “report the presence of forests…” or “provide information about the forested areas around…”

Line 16: “disamina” it doesn’t appear to be an English word. Did the author meant “examination”?

Line 16: “detected by” instead of “thanks”, same in line 20. “through out” could be used as well

Line 20 and 27: Palaeo-watercourse instead of palaeowatercourse should be used.

Line 23-25: rephrase, “thanks to”, “we would like to”

Line 30: when? A time frame should be specified at the beginning of the paragraph. Also the Latin words should also be translate in English, even in parenthesis e.g. paludes (marsh or swamp). This should be done for all the Latin words; readers may not be familiar with Latin.

Line 32: rephrase “manifold vegetal world”, did the author mean forested area?

Line 38: rephrase “big botanical finding”

Line 40: Google Earth should be cited properly; “see over”…?

Line 47: palaeoalvi, should be in italic and a translation should be provided

Line 52: rephrase

A major editing for the English language is required

Line 108: “protohistory?” why the question mark?

Figure 5 and 8 require an extended caption

Line 115: it doesn’t need to be said, a citation would be enough

Lines 132-135: just a citation is enough

Line 138-142: it doesn’t seem necessary to explain this part but maybe a diagram could be useful to show the functions used

Figure 9: bigger imagines would be appropriate. Cutting the empty area and enlarging the maps could help

Lines 193-194: clarify and rephrase

Lines 203-205: rephrase

Lines 236-242: it’s not clear the reason to refer to this study, please elaborate the connection with the present study

Line 242: reporting common names of the species in English would be appropriate

Line 243: replace carbon 14 with radiocarbon or ¹⁴C

Line 249: it is not necessary to specify the title superintendent…

Line 250: “farnia” is not the common name in English, report the correct name: Ulmus should be followed by “spp.” if the species is not specified

Lines 266-268: why these data are not presented? if they are not available, this sentence should be deleted

Lines 281-284: report the common name of the trees in English

The Conclusion section needs to be extended and pointing out the findings of the paper.

Author Response

Dear colleague,
thanks for reviewing my work.
I entered the required translations and followed the required modification following your instructions.
On file attached, I have included some explanations on issues and questions submitted in the review.

Thanks for collaboration!

The author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Line 46 “here we present…” instead of “here we would like to introduce…”

Line 253 please add spp. After the genus unless the species is reported

Line 262 same as above and in the entire text

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thanks for the indications.

I have entered other data.

The future reader of the text, if interested in botanical specifications, will certainly read the contributions of the paleobotanists cited in bibliographers.

Thanks for the attention!

The Author