Major concerns-
0) The manuscript references multiple figures available in the supplementary data which was not made available as part of the preprint. This hindered our ability to understand the fine points of the experiments. We encourage the authors to upload the supplementary data to bioRxiv. 
1) The figure 2 is an important figure showcasing the effects of 3-CA disturbance frequencies on organic carbon (plots A, C), biomass (plot C) and nitrification products (plots B, D). We would suggest the authors to make the functional data for Day 14 (currently available in the supplementary Figure 2) in the main paper, which will make the observed correlations on Day 35 easier to understand.
Similarly, it would be interesting to have a PCoA plot of an intermediate day in Figure 1 for continuity of message and to support the authors' results of observed patterns on Day 35.
2) The paper was a very interesting read and we had a very lively discussion about what kind of measurements, we as readers would like to see in the paper. So, we would like to suggest some improvements in the experimental design-
3) We would welcome the use of different statistical tests for data analysis and visual colours to represent different disturbance levels. We would like to suggest the addition of distinct data labels for each of the disturbance levels. For example in Figure 3, along with using identical colours in A, B and C plots, usage of identical data labels in C would help make the figure more interpretable.