Effects of Understory Vegetation Conversion on Soil Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Soil C and N Pools in Chinese Hickory Plantation Forests
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Several questions and remarks regarding the paper by Gao et al. “Effects of understory vegetation conversion on soil greenhouse gas emissions and soil C and N pools in Chinese hickory plantation forests”.
Latin binomial nomenclature and authority should be provided after each common name the first time it is referred to in the text. For every plant mentioned in the text, provide its full Latin name. For Chinese hickory, safflower camellia, wild rape, etc.
Avoid abbreviations in the abstract. Furthermore, the abbreviations should be deciphered at the first mention. For example, these abbreviations (WSOC, MBC, WSON, MBN) is only explained on pages 281–282 and 338–339.
You planted a safflower camellia as a test plant. Camellia spp. are evergreen shrubs or small trees. What size were the seedlings?
For the Chinese hickory trees at the test sites, what were their average ages and heights?
Before beginning the experiment, you determined the basic physicochemical properties of the soil at the test sites. Bulk density, effective potassium, effective phosphorus, total nitrogen, etc. Why did you not establish the same parameters after the experiment to determine the effects of understory vegetation conversion on soil properties?
Additional data on environmental factors, such as the average monthly air temperature and monthly precipitation, must be included when analysing changes in parameters, such as soil temperature and moisture. Throughout the duration of the research.
Why have not you compared changes in aboveground and belowground biomass in terms of changes in greenhouse gas emissions and soil carbon and nitrogen stocks?
“Between July 2022 and June 2022”. (Lines139). Maybe “June 2023”?
Discussion section. Paragraphs between lines 392 and 414. What are these arguments and conclusions based on? For example. “The density of the root system and secretion production of understory vegetation vary depending on the planting density”. (Lines 399-401). “In this study, the root system growth of understory vegetation resulted in good soil permeability condition…” (Lines 408-409). This is a purely speculative conclusion. Information on root system research was absent from the study.
Figure 1. Figures 1a and 1b do not depict the layout of the test sample plots. Simply put, these graphs only depict the location of the research area within Zhejiang province. Figure 1c. Pecan? Maybe Chinese hickory? Furthermore, this figure contains only a branch of a tree (probably Chinese hickory) and a small portion of the undergrowth (before or after the experiment?). With this figure, what message did you wish to convey to the readers?
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Hello.
Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule to revise my manuscript.
I have revised my paper according to your review comments. Specifically, you can refer to the document I sent with my reply.
If you have any questions about my reply, you are welcome to reply to me.
Thank you again and have a nice life.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Review forests-2900176 Gao
Dear authors,
The article is informative and can be published after revision
Summary - decipher the abbreviations WSOC, MBC, WSON, MBN
In summary, will add: The total emissions of soil CO2 and N2O significantly increase, while the accumulation of soil organic carbon and nitrogen and their water-soluble forms is noted during the Understory Vegetation Conversion
Also write what modification scheme and what planting density do you recommend?
The article must be supplemented with the results of seasonal observations carried out by the authors
Unclear Phrases The structural equation 325 model showed that the main drivers of soil CO2 emission fluxes were soil 326 NO3--N content and soil MBC content, which showed a positive correlation. 328 however, soil CO2 emissions were not significantly associated with soil MBC content (p > 0.05) 329
(MBC) has the most significant effect of im-332 on soil methane (CH4) emissions, showing a significant positive correlation (p < 0.01). 333. Contradictions. However, emissions of soil methane (CH4) in modified forests decrease, while Cmic increases
However-410 compared to control, understory modification 411 attenuated the uptake of WHAT??? soil into the atmosphere.
Most soil WSOC and WSON come from old soil humus, 439 and Who discovered it???
the content of soil WSOC and WSON increased. 440
444,. At the same time, the average annual value was significantly higher that What??? (p < 0.01). Our results 445
It is necessary to write that the relative % of the studied parameters are mainly considered, not absolute %
Write the numbers % NOT 10.22%, write 10%.
Write absolute data on Nitrogen to tenths after the decimal point 1.2 and not 1.24
Sincerely
25.02. 2024
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Hello.
Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule to revise my manuscript.
I have revised my paper according to your review comments. Specifically, you can refer to the document I sent with my reply.
If you have any questions about my reply, you are welcome to reply to me.
Thank you again and have a nice life.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Review Report
Manuscript ID: forests-2900176
Title: Effects of Understory Vegetation Conversion on Soil Green-house Gas Emissions and Soil C and N Pools in Chinese Hickory Plantation Forests
Authors: Yanyan Gao , Haitao Shi , Yangen Chen , Sha Huang , Enhui Wang , Zelong Ni , Yufeng Zhou , Yongjun Shi
Dear Authors,
Please provide detailed, step-by-step answers to all my comments.
I saw a few details that need to be improved or corrected. I described all these details in the reviewer's comments in the pdf file.
General comments:
In the manuscript submitted for review, the authors examined the effects of understory vegetation transformation on soil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and soil C and N stocks in Chinese hickory plantation forests. In a 12-month field experiment, various methods of understory renovation were used: varied planting density of safflower and strip and spot sowing of wild rapeseed compared to the control treatment - without vegetation. The research showed that the modification of understory vegetation significantly increased CO2 and N2O emission fluxes from the soil and reduced CH4 emission fluxes from the soil. However, I have doubts about CH4. The authors presented negative values in the figure, which may mislead the reader. If the emission is negative, it is called absorption. I am asking the authors to try to edit the work following my suggestions, which I included in the PDF version of the manuscript.
Detailed comments:
Title
OK
Authors
OK
Abstract
Line 18: Please rephrase as below:
This study investigates the impact of renovating understory vegetation on these factors in Chinese hickory plantation forests, different understory renovation modes were used in a 12-month field experiment: safflower camellia (SC) planting density of 600 plants ha-1 and wild rape (WR) strip sowing (UM1); SC 600 plants ha-1 and WR scatter sowing (UM2); SC 1200 plants ha-1 and WR strip sowing (UM3); SC 1200 plants ha-1 and WR scatter sowing (UM4); and removal of understory vegetation layer (CK).
Line 26: Please see the general comment
Line 27: Please provide the full name when using the term for the first time along with the abbreviation (in brackets), then only the abbreviation may be used.
water-soluble organic carbon (WSOC), microbial biomass C (MBC), water-soluble organic nitrogen (WSON), microbial biomass N (MBN),
This rule applies to the abstract and, separately, the content of the manuscript body (the rest of the sections).
Keywords
OK
1. Introduction
Lines 42 and many others: Please insert a space between the last word and [...]
Please check it throughout the manuscript
Line 42: Please see comment (line 27)
greenhouse gas (GHG)
Line 65: Please mention: Chinese hickory (Carya cathayensis Sarg.) according to: Lu, A.; Stone, D.; Grauke, L. Juglandaceae. Flora China 1999, 4, 277–285
Line 76: Please see comment (line 27)
Please provide the full name when using the term for the first time along with the abbreviation (in brackets), then only the abbreviation may be used.
water-soluble organic carbon (WSOC), microbial biomass carbon (MBC)
Lines 82-83: Please add a Latin name
Line 83: Safflower camelia, Camelia oleifera, Safflower oilseed tea
Please use only one name (do not mix it)
Line 87: soluble organic nitrogen (WSON), microbial biomass N (MBN),
2. Material and Methods
2.1. General description of the study area
Line 106: Is better to use trees than plants.
Lines 110-111: Please use superscripts
For effective potassium and effective phosphorus please change to K-available and P-available
Line 114: Something new? :)
Please decide what name the authors use for this species?
Chinese hickory
Carya cathayensis
Pecan tree
If you initially chose the name Chinese hickory, please use it consistently throughout the manuscript.
2.2. Experimental design
Line 117: What does mean "pure" Chinese hickory plantation?
Line 123: please use abbreviation SC or consistently safflower camelia!
Line 124: wild rape (WR)
Lines 124-129: Please see comment (line 21-25)
2.3. Measurement of greenhouse gas emissions from soils
Please change to 2.3. Measurement of GHG emissions from soils
Line 139: Ge et al. made your study?
This part of the manuscript is incomprehensible. Who used gas boxes? Who monitored greenhouse gas emissions?
Proposal below:
Between July 2022 and June 2022, the study utilized the static box-gas chromatography approach to monitor soil CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions according to the method of Ge et al. [18].
Line 151: capillary and packed gas chromatograph GC-204 (Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan)
Line 165: are you using ppm units in this manuscript?
2.4. Measurement methods for soil physic-chemical properties
Please change to: Measurement methods for soil physico-chemical properties
Line 190: Shimadzu Total Organic Carbon Analyzer (TOC-VCPH) (Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan)
Line 195: pH, pH-meter
2.5. Statistics and analyses
Lines 211-214:
SPSS 19.0 data analysis software (IBM Inc., Amok, NC, USA)
Microsoft Excel 2013 software (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA)
Origin 2018 (OriginLab Inc., Northampton, MA, USA)
AMOS (Analysis of Moment Structures) 24.0 module.
3. Results
3.1. Impact of understory vegetation conversion on soil greenhouse gas emissions
Lines 217-221: Yes, this is true for CO2 and N2O, but what about CH4?
How to interpret NH4 emissions?
In the text of the manuscript, the authors should explain to the readers the calculation method and why negative values are given in the case of CH4.
Why did the authors provide negative emission and not the value converted into uptake?
If a negative result is obtained, can we talk about emissions?
Line 244: emissions?
Line 245: Were the values negative? Was it an emission or an uptake?
Lines 245-255: How it was calculated. What was the baseline?
Line 265: Please enlarge the font (axis descriptions)
Line 357: Please enlarge the font
4. Discussion
4.1. Impact of understory vegetation conversion on soil greenhouse gas emissions
Please change to: Impact of understory vegetation conversion on soil GHG emissions
References
Lines 566-659: References should be described as follows, depending on the type of work:
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/forests/instructions
1. Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, page range.
2. Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Title of the chapter. In Book Title, 2nd ed.; Editor 1, A., Editor 2, B., Eds.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, 2007; Volume 3, pp. 154–196.
3. Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Book Title, 3rd ed.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, 2008; pp. 154–196.
4. Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C. Title of Unpublished Work. Abbreviated Journal Name year, phrase indicating stage of publication (submitted; accepted; in press).
5. Author 1, A.B. (University, City, State, Country); Author 2, C. (Institute, City, State, Country). Personal communication, 2012.
6. Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D.; Author 3, E.F. Title of Presentation. In Proceedings of the Name of the Conference, Location of Conference, Country, Date of Conference (Day Month Year).
7. Author 1, A.B. Title of Thesis. Level of Thesis, Degree-Granting University, Location of University, Date of Completion.
8. Title of Site. Available online: URL (accessed on Day Month Year).
See the Reference List and Citations Guide for more detailed information. https://www.mdpi.com/authors/references
Line 566:
Lamb, W.F.; Wiedmann, T.; Pongratz, J.; Andrew, R.; Crippa, M.; Olivier, J.G.J.; Wiedenhofer, D.; Mattioli, G.; Khourdajie, A.A.; House, J.; Pachauri, S.; Figueroa, M.; Saheb, Y.; Slade, R.; Hubacek, K.; Sun, L.; Ribeiro, S.K.; Khennas, S.; de la Rue du Can, S.; Chapungu, L.; Davis, S.J.; Bashmakov, I; Dai H.; Dhakal, S.; Tan, X.; Geng, Y.; Gu' B.; Minx, J. A review of trends and drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 7.
Line 568:
Rajeev, J.; Hukum, S. Carbon sequestration potential of disturbed and non-disturbed forest ecosystem: A tool for mitigating climate change. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2020, 14(11): p. 385-393.
Please do it for all cited items
Dear Authors,
After taking into account the corrections, I recommend your manuscript be resend for final review, before publication in Forests MDPI Journal.
Yours sincerely
Reviewer
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Hello.
Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule to revise my manuscript.
I have revised my paper according to your review comments. Specifically, you can refer to the document I sent with my reply.
If you have any questions about my reply, you are welcome to reply to me.
Thank you again and have a nice life.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
All the issues I cared about were addressed by the authors. The manuscript has been carefully revised.
Author Response
Dear reviewer 1,
Hello.
Thank you very much for your comments and help in my essay revision, and I wish you a great day.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Review Report
Manuscript ID: forests-2900176
Title: Effects of Understory Vegetation Conversion on Soil Green-house Gas Emissions and Soil C and N Pools in Chinese Hickory Plantation Forests
Authors: Yanyan Gao , Haitao Shi , Yangen Chen , Sha Huang , Enhui Wang , Zelong Ni , Yufeng Zhou , Yongjun Shi
Dear Authors,
I saw a few small technical details that should be corrected, please see the reviewer's comments in the pdf file.
Most of my suggestions have been implemented. The authors have revised the manuscript.
Yours sincerely
Reviewer
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewers,
Hello.
thank you very much for your comments and help in the revision of my paper, I have revised the question you raised again, I hope you will check it out, I wish you a happy life.
