Natural Regeneration of the Tree Stand in the Bilberry Spruce Forest—Clear-Cutting Ecotone Complex in the First Post-Logging Decade
, Viktor N. Mamontov 2, Alexander M. Kryshen 1, Vladimir A. Kharitonov 1, Sergey A. Moshnikov 1 and Elena V. Toropova 2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The natural regeneration has been analysed in current study. The study material and design is good, however, the manuscript needs to be improved.
Introduction is focused on description of forest harvesting practice in particular region while literature about regeneration ecology of studied species is pretty much ignored. Mainly because of that, the research problem (aim of the study) is defined poorly and not based on knowledge gaps discovered during the literature analysis on studied subject. Also, the considerations - why particular species (trees and scrubs) are included in analysis is not provided. It is not clear - how topical this particular study is and how the new knowledge will be used in the future.
The English in not really fluent and manuscript is hard to read. Term “advanced regeneration” is misused. Presentation of the results in graphs has to be improved. There are some results presented as findings of the current paper which are not proved by the data analyses. It has to clearly separated – which findings are already published in previous papers (referenced in Results chapter) and what is discovered in current study.
More specific comments can be found in the reviewed manuscript.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Your manuscript seems to be interesting,however, some improvements are needed to increse the quality of it. Please, follow the comments listem in the attached d file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript has been improved and can be published.
