Elemental Behavior during Weathering and Pedogenesis of Clay-Rich Red Soils Developed in Different Lithologies in Java–Madura and Sulawesi in Indonesia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
I have read and evaluated the submitted paper.
I think that the paper presents an interesting topic with a high number of geochemical data.
The organization of the work is correct and the English language needs minor corrections.
However, I noticed the biggest problem in the figures, which are accurate but often are not clear and well-readable. I would advise the authors to make some changes to the figures that I have indicated in my comments.
You can find some comments in the attached file.
For these reasons I suggest a minor revision before the publication.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reviewer 1 Comments point by point:
TITLE
Can you add an indication about the studied area? I think that Indonesia is too general.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We’ve added more specific location in the title, please see line 2-4 of the revised manuscript. The title now reads “Elemental behaviour during weathering and pedogenesis of clay-rich red soils developed over different lithologies from Jawa–Madura and Sulawesi in Indonesia”.
INTRODUCTION
Line 52: I would not insert the Geological and geographical information in the Materials and
Methods section. First Geology and in the following section, you can add Materials and Methods
and sampling activity.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently removed Geological and geographical information from the Materials and Methods section. Please see line 52 of the revised manuscript.
RESULTS
Table 2: Major oxides are not indicated in the right way. Si, Al, Fe, Na, P, Ti are oxides? You should
indicate with the right formula: SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3……
Response: Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestion. We have indicated the correct formula for the major oxides in Table 2 (SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3 MgO, CaO, Na2O, K2O, MnO, TiO2, P2O5). Please see line 162 of the revised manuscript.
Line 164: Major elements (wt.%).
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed the sentence to Major element oxides (wt.%). Please see line 164 of the revised manuscript.
Line 170: Total organic carbon, reduce the dimension of g kg-1
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently reduced the font size of g kg-1. Please see line 169 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 3: Please move the name of the profile in the upper part of the each diagram, not below.
Try to enlarge the legends of the diagrams, sometimes is not easy to read the text.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestion. We have subsequently moved the name of the profile to the upper part of each diagram. Also, we have enlarged the legends of the figures so that they are clearer and more readable. Please see figure 3 in line 191 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 4: I do not see Figure 4 for REEs distribution. Please add
You should indicate the rock you used for the REEs normalization (Cho??, PAAS??, UCC??).
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. Sorry for the missing Figure 4, we have subsequently added Figure 4 in the revised manuscript. Please see line 216 of the revised manuscript. We have use Chondrite-normalized REE.
Figure 5, 6 ,7. Also in this case, I would suggest you to enlarge the figures since the text is very
small and hard to read. You can divide the figures in more pages.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently enlarged Figures 5, 6, and 7. Please see lines 248-258 of the revised manuscript.
DISCUSSION
Figure 8e: Si should be SiO2
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently changed Si to SiO2. Please see Figure 8 in line 276 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 9: Add unit measures for considered elements. Figure 9c and 9d Ti = TiO2
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently added the unit of measurement in the figures. Also added the TiO2 to Figure 9c and 9d. Please see line 294 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 303 and 304. Indicate the normalizing rock La??/Yb??, Gd??/Yb??
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently added LaN/YbN, GdN/YbN. Please see lines 307, 308 of the revised manuscript.
Line 496, Figure 11 Al2O3 is not “Al” in the diagram but should be “A”
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed “Al” to “A”. Please see Figure 11, line 498 of the revised manuscript.
Dear editor,
I have read and evaluated the submitted paper.
I think that the paper presents an interesting topic with a high number of geochemical data.
The organization of the work is correct and the English language needs minor corrections.
However, I noticed the biggest problem in the figures, which are accurate but often are not clear
and well-readable. I would advise the authors to make some changes to the figures that I have
indicated in my comments.
You can find some comments in the attached file.
For these reasons I suggest a minor revision before the publication.
Reviewer 1 Comments point by point:
TITLE
Can you add an indication about the studied area? I think that Indonesia is too general.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We’ve added more specific location in the title, please see line 2-4 of the revised manuscript. The title now reads “Elemental behaviour during weathering and pedogenesis of clay-rich red soils developed over different lithologies from Jawa–Madura and Sulawesi in Indonesia”.
INTRODUCTION
Line 52: I would not insert the Geological and geographical information in the Materials and
Methods section. First Geology and in the following section, you can add Materials and Methods
and sampling activity.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently removed Geological and geographical information from the Materials and Methods section. Please see line 52 of the revised manuscript.
RESULTS
Table 2: Major oxides are not indicated in the right way. Si, Al, Fe, Na, P, Ti are oxides? You should
indicate with the right formula: SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3……
Response: Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestion. We have indicated the correct formula for the major oxides in Table 2 (SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3 MgO, CaO, Na2O, K2O, MnO, TiO2, P2O5). Please see line 162 of the revised manuscript.
Line 164: Major elements (wt.%).
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed the sentence to Major element oxides (wt.%). Please see line 164 of the revised manuscript.
Line 170: Total organic carbon, reduce the dimension of g kg-1
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently reduced the font size of g kg-1. Please see line 169 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 3: Please move the name of the profile in the upper part of the each diagram, not below.
Try to enlarge the legends of the diagrams, sometimes is not easy to read the text.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestion. We have subsequently moved the name of the profile to the upper part of each diagram. Also, we have enlarged the legends of the figures so that they are clearer and more readable. Please see figure 3 in line 191 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 4: I do not see Figure 4 for REEs distribution. Please add
You should indicate the rock you used for the REEs normalization (Cho??, PAAS??, UCC??).
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. Sorry for the missing Figure 4, we have subsequently added Figure 4 in the revised manuscript. Please see line 216 of the revised manuscript. We have use Chondrite-normalized REE.
Figure 5, 6 ,7. Also in this case, I would suggest you to enlarge the figures since the text is very
small and hard to read. You can divide the figures in more pages.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently enlarged Figures 5, 6, and 7. Please see lines 248-258 of the revised manuscript.
DISCUSSION
Figure 8e: Si should be SiO2
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently changed Si to SiO2. Please see Figure 8 in line 276 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 9: Add unit measures for considered elements. Figure 9c and 9d Ti = TiO2
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently added the unit of measurement in the figures. Also added the TiO2 to Figure 9c and 9d. Please see line 294 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 303 and 304. Indicate the normalizing rock La??/Yb??, Gd??/Yb??
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently added LaN/YbN, GdN/YbN. Please see lines 307, 308 of the revised manuscript.
Line 496, Figure 11 Al2O3 is not “Al” in the diagram but should be “A”
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed “Al” to “A”. Please see Figure 11, line 498 of the revised manuscript.
Dear editor,
I have read and evaluated the submitted paper.
I think that the paper presents an interesting topic with a high number of geochemical data.
The organization of the work is correct and the English language needs minor corrections.
However, I noticed the biggest problem in the figures, which are accurate but often are not clear
and well-readable. I would advise the authors to make some changes to the figures that I have
indicated in my comments.
You can find some comments in the attached file.
For these reasons I suggest a minor revision before the publication.
Reviewer 1 Comments point by point:
TITLE
Can you add an indication about the studied area? I think that Indonesia is too general.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We’ve added more specific location in the title, please see line 2-4 of the revised manuscript. The title now reads “Elemental behaviour during weathering and pedogenesis of clay-rich red soils developed over different lithologies from Jawa–Madura and Sulawesi in Indonesia”.
INTRODUCTION
Line 52: I would not insert the Geological and geographical information in the Materials and
Methods section. First Geology and in the following section, you can add Materials and Methods
and sampling activity.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently removed Geological and geographical information from the Materials and Methods section. Please see line 52 of the revised manuscript.
RESULTS
Table 2: Major oxides are not indicated in the right way. Si, Al, Fe, Na, P, Ti are oxides? You should
indicate with the right formula: SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3……
Response: Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestion. We have indicated the correct formula for the major oxides in Table 2 (SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3 MgO, CaO, Na2O, K2O, MnO, TiO2, P2O5). Please see line 162 of the revised manuscript.
Line 164: Major elements (wt.%).
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed the sentence to Major element oxides (wt.%). Please see line 164 of the revised manuscript.
Line 170: Total organic carbon, reduce the dimension of g kg-1
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently reduced the font size of g kg-1. Please see line 169 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 3: Please move the name of the profile in the upper part of the each diagram, not below.
Try to enlarge the legends of the diagrams, sometimes is not easy to read the text.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestion. We have subsequently moved the name of the profile to the upper part of each diagram. Also, we have enlarged the legends of the figures so that they are clearer and more readable. Please see figure 3 in line 191 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 4: I do not see Figure 4 for REEs distribution. Please add
You should indicate the rock you used for the REEs normalization (Cho??, PAAS??, UCC??).
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. Sorry for the missing Figure 4, we have subsequently added Figure 4 in the revised manuscript. Please see line 216 of the revised manuscript. We have use Chondrite-normalized REE.
Figure 5, 6 ,7. Also in this case, I would suggest you to enlarge the figures since the text is very
small and hard to read. You can divide the figures in more pages.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently enlarged Figures 5, 6, and 7. Please see lines 248-258 of the revised manuscript.
DISCUSSION
Figure 8e: Si should be SiO2
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently changed Si to SiO2. Please see Figure 8 in line 276 of the revised manuscript.
Figure 9: Add unit measures for considered elements. Figure 9c and 9d Ti = TiO2
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently added the unit of measurement in the figures. Also added the TiO2 to Figure 9c and 9d. Please see line 294 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 303 and 304. Indicate the normalizing rock La??/Yb??, Gd??/Yb??
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently added LaN/YbN, GdN/YbN. Please see lines 307, 308 of the revised manuscript.
Line 496, Figure 11 Al2O3 is not “Al” in the diagram but should be “A”
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed “Al” to “A”. Please see Figure 11, line 498 of the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors, thank you very much for your contribution.
I think the article fairly discusses the soil profiles among the different parts of Indonesia. I am a bit doubtful about the origin of the elemental differences related to the section floored by the basaltic units since their source might add different REE values (such as OIB-like lavas containing very high LREE values).
In any case, the manuscript is well written and after adding and discussing a couple of additional points it can be published. You can find my specific comments embedded in the pdf file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reviewer 2 Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear authors, thank you very much for your contribution.
I think the article fairly discusses the soil profiles among the different parts of Indonesia. I am a bit doubtful about the origin of the elemental differences related to the section floored by the basaltic units since their source might add different REE values (such as OIB-like lavas containing very high LREE values).
In any case, the manuscript is well written and after adding and discussing a couple of additional points it can be published. You can find my specific comments embedded in the pdf file.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We certainly agree that the type of the basalt and the mode of occurrence can influence the level of LREE, as enriched and or Ocean Island Type Basaltic lavas usually has high levels of LREE.
I suggest you to revise this part a bit and state that you working on the two area, the explanation looks a bit confusing
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently indicated in the title and throughout the revised manuscript that studied soil profiles located in two districts in Indonesia.
table 3 capitalized.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion, we have subsequently capitalized Table and Figure throughout the revised manuscript. Please see line 172 of the revised manuscript.
The REE pattern were similar with those from southern China [22,27] and Jamaica [4] (Figure 4), however differ in Ce and Eu anomalies due local physiochemical properties.
But it is strictly depending on the dataset you used. Obviously they can be differ from each other
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and we do agree with you.
(LaN/YbN and GdN/YbN)
Please change normalization values to the lowercase
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently changed normalized values to lowercase. Please see lines 307, 308 and throughout the revised manuscript.
Cr3+ uppercase
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently changed to superscript. Please see lines 393 of the revised manuscript. Cr3+
However, the enrichment in LREE for the basalt (KA-KC) and NA profiles were due to the ability for the ions to form stable secondary minerals resulting in accumulation at different sections of the profiles (Figure 7a).
This can be also controlled by the type of the basalt. Enriched or Ocean Island Type Basaltic lavas usually display elevated LREE values depending on their mode of occurrence, you can also discuss this issue a bit.
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We do agree with your statement.
Rhapdophane
I think it is called "Rhabdophane"
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have subsequently changed “Rhapdophane” to "Rhabdophane". Please see line 410 of the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Title is ok.
Lines 13-14, Abstract: Normally soils are products of weathering so you do not need to use the adjective here to denote the noun.
Lines 73-75, Figure 1: n this figure, you need to present the location map first with the exact locations of studied areas. Then, you present the three areas that have been studied in detailed. You do no need to report the rock types in the figure caption because you have a legend already but in the caption you need to tell the reader that the red dots represent the different soil sections (6 profiles) included in your study.
Line 96, Table 1: You need to insert the direction after the digits. Please apply to all either in the text or in the table.
Lines 95 and 143: Pay attention to punctuation all over the text especially the capital letters for Figures and Tables.
Line2149-150: Here you express about silica content as an oxide while the data in Table 2 include an elemental value, i.e. Si and not SiO2. Please unify and consider the same for the rest of the analyzed major oxides.
Line 162, Table 2: Major oxides should be given as oxides. The table misses totals of analyzed oxides plus TOC. Convert to SiO2 and same for Al, Fe, ....etc. Otherwise you present your data in the result section elementally. For the footnotes, you need to show astrix for each parameter you include below the table.
Line 171: I wonder if the detection limits of all oxides is the same (0.001 wt%)?!.
Lines 184-186: You need to separate your results from interpretation and move this to the discussion section. Please check for the same in the result section. Lines 238-241 have the same problem.
Line 191: This seems strange and difficult to believe that the limit of detection is constant for all oxides and trace elements. Please refer to the original data you received from the laboratory.
Lines 193-195: Caption of Figure 3: Needs some little modification, e.g., basalt-based profile.
Line 273: Figure 8 shows a graphical representation of major oxides include ferric iron. In Table 2 you provide content of iron as total Fe, i.e. elemental without distinguishing ferrous (FeO) and ferric (Fe2O3) components. Please check for this and explain the procedure that you might used to separate them.
Line 290, Fig. 9: Are there any reference analyses of similar to your Indonesian examples as you did in Fig. 8 for the major oxides?.
Line 299: You need to insert a reference here to support your interpretation that inclination of the trend is correlated with the source rock.
Lines 345, 353 and 383: In some other instances in your discussion, you need to insert references too.
Discussion and conclusion sections are ok to a great extent.
Line 537: Please check if you edited your references are prepared carefully according to the journal (Sustainability) style or not.
Please use the attached pdf for your revision.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reviewer 3 Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Title is ok.
Lines 13-14, Abstract: Normally soils are products of weathering so you do not need to use the adjective here to denote the noun.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently deleted weathering in the revised manuscript. Please see line 13 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 73-75, Figure 1: n this figure, you need to present the location map first with the exact locations of studied areas. Then, you present the three areas that have been studied in detailed. You do no need to report the rock types in the figure caption because you have a legend already but in the caption you need to tell the reader that the red dots represent the different soil sections (6 profiles) included in your study.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently presented the location map of the study area and then the exact location of the six different soil profiles. Also, we deleted the rock types from the figure caption and we indicated that the red dots represent the soil different profiles. Please see Figure 1, line 73 of the revised manuscript.
Line 96, Table 1: You need to insert the direction after the digits. Please apply to all either in the text or in the table.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently inserted the direction after the digits. Please see Table 1, lines 96-98 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 95 and 143: Pay attention to punctuation all over the text especially the capital letters for Figures and Tables.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently capitalized Figures and Tables throughout the revised manuscript.
Lines149-150: Here you express about silica content as an oxide while the data in Table 2 include an elemental value, i.e. Si and not SiO2. Please unify and consider the same for the rest of the analyzed major oxides.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently changed the elemental value to major element oxides throughout the revised manuscript.
Line 162, Table 2: Major oxides should be given as oxides. The table misses totals of analyzed oxides plus TOC. Convert to SiO2 and same for Al, Fe,..etc. Otherwise you present your data in the result section elementally. For the footnotes, you need to show astrix for each parameter you include below the table.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently inserted total major element oxides in Table 2. We have changed all the major element to major element oxides throughout the entire manuscript. Please see Table 2, line 162 of the revised manuscript.
Line 171: I wonder if the detection limits of all oxides is the same (0.001 wt%)?!.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment. The detection limit of all the oxides is not the same. Please see Table 2, line 162 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 184-186: You need to separate your results from interpretation and move this to the discussion section. Please check for the same in the result section. Lines 238-241 have the same problem.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently removed the interpretation section from the result section.
Line 191: This seems strange and difficult to believe that the limit of detection is constant for all oxides and trace elements. Please refer to the original data you received from the laboratory.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. In referring to the original data received from the laboratory, the detection limit is not constant for all the major element oxides and trace elements. Please see Table 2, line 162 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 193-195: Caption of Figure 3: Needs some little modification, e.g., basalt-based profile.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently modified the caption of Figure 3 to include basalt-based profile. Please see Figure 3, line 191 of the revised manuscript.
Line 273: Figure 8 shows a graphical representation of major oxides include ferric iron. In Table 2 you provide content of iron as total Fe, i.e. elemental without distinguishing ferrous (FeO) and ferric (Fe2O3) components. Please check for this and explain the procedure that you might used to separate them.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. The values presented in Table 2 represent Total Fe2O3T. Please see Table 2, line 162 of the revised manuscript. There was no separation of ferrous (FeO) from ferric (Fe2O3).
Line 290, Fig. 9: Are there any reference analyses of similar to your Indonesian examples as you did in Fig. 8 for the major oxides?.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. Researchers often used different combination of high field strength elements (HFSE) ratio to explain the addition of aeolian deposition during chemical weathering. Sorry we were not able to find similar references in a particular location that used all the HFSE in the figure.
Line 299: You need to insert a reference here to support your interpretation that inclination of the trend is correlated with the source rock.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently inserted the missing reference in the discussion section. Please see line 303 of the revised manuscript.
Lines 345, 353 and 383: In some other instances in your discussion, you need to insert references too.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. Sorry for the missing references. We have subsequently inserted the references in the discussion section. Please see line 349 of the revised manuscript. We have deleted the other section that could not be reference. Please see line 385 of the revised manuscript.
Discussion and conclusion sections are ok to a great extent.
Line 537: Please check if you edited your references are prepared carefully according to the journal (Sustainability) style or not.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion. We have subsequently revised the reference section to reflect the journal style. Please see reference in lines 540-711 of the revised manuscript.
Please use the attached pdf for your revision.
Response: Thank you for your valuable comment and suggestion.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
