Correlation between Changes in Soil Properties and Microbial Diversity Driven by Different Management in Artificial Chinese Fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata (Lamb.) Hook.) Plantations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Your research paper is very interesting because it shows the correlation between changes in the chemical and biological properties of the soil in different ways of managing Chinese fir plantations. The layout of the article is standard for scientific papers. Manuscript is prepared carefully.  However, I have a one remark:

In the text, reference numbers should be placed in square brackets [ ], and placed before the punctuation; for example [1], [1–3] or [1,3]. Prepare a document according to the guidelines for Forests https://www.mdpi.com/journal/forests/instructions.

 

In my opinion, the results, discussion and conclusion chapters are well written.

The language appears to be correct, but I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style.

 

Good luck!

Sincerely yours

Reviewer

Author Response

Dear reviewers,

 

    Thank you for your supports and encouragements, which provide the valuable guide-line for the revise and improvement. And also, we would like to apologize for the delay in replying. Recently, we were carrying out a field work, and the weak signal in the forest limited connection of the internet.

    We have revised the format of the reference according to your valuable suggestion. We will also pay more attention to the format requirements on different journals in the future submission.

    Finally, please allow us once again to express our sincere gratitude to you. We are here to express our deeply salute to you and we will also keep your teachings in mind. Wish you all the best.

 

Best regards,

Chen, Yu.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

General comments:

ABSTRACT

Language grammar check and edition is recommended.

I would mention soil microbes and why is necessary to study of the effect of different management in the abstract.  Just by one or two sentences.

Say how soil properties and other factors differed. Increased or decreased. Where were certain soil properties higher or lower under certain among M1-M3?

Some statements in abstract are inaccurate- for example Soil bacteria with relatively higher abundance. More correct is Soil bacterial genera …

Does evenly distributed means that there were not statistically significant differences? This should be written more clearly.

INTRODUCTION

Avoid using words like certain. For example: certain nutrients – be more accurate – which nutrients.

The main objectives of the study should be included at the end of introduction.

Write more about main differences among various forest management types.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Methods and statistical instruments used in this study are appropriate and well designed. However, some terms related biostatistics should be checked. For example, chimeric tags – the correct term should be chimeric sequences or chimeric tag sequences. Ask sequencing company for detailed workflow.

RESULTS:

Any suggestions or hypothesis should be placed in discussion section.

For example: lines 235-239 - this part rather belongs to discussion.

DISCUSSION

The discussion needs substantial improvement so that the discussion part should not include repeated results or too general statements. This belongs either to results part or to introduction. For example, “Soil in the forest is the basic element for the ecosystem (Seifert, 1973; Riise, et al., 1992; 465 Gleeson, et al., 2016). ” – this is too general statement which belongs to introduction. Please do not repeat results in discussion too much. Just mention main outputs and then discuss your hypothesis.

Specific comments:

L 19: Maybe use term forest management practice

L28-29: This is confusing. All these fungi are saprotrophs. Trichoderma can be also mycotrophic.

L 38-44: This paragraph is confusing. I think it needs language editing.

L 49: which pattern? One of the three patterns mentioned earlier?

L 67: You mean management pattern?

L 77: This is confusing statement “As sensitive and volatile mediators in the artificial plantation”. Please delete. Instead of this, write some statement showing importance of soil microbes in terms of how is expected diversity and their functional role in soil ecosystem.

L 129: each sampling plots

L 166: ITS2 region of 18S rRNA gene and 16S r RNA gene, the s should be capital S -16S rRNA and 18S rRNA …  The DNA is material you had extracted but you amplify and sequence 16S rRNA gene as a biomarker of bacterial community.

L 188: chimeric sequences or chimeric tag sequences?

L 204-205: Were these indices calculated from OTUs table (matrix)?

L 235-239: this part rather belongs to discussion.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewers, Thank you for your supports and encouragements, especially for the criticisms and suggestions, which make us fully aware of our shortcomings, and provide the valuable guide-line for the revise and improvement. After reading your excellent review report carefully, we deeply realize that our manuscript has a lot of defects needed to be improved. In response to your valuable suggestions, we sincerely make the following explanations and revise: 1. In the ABSTRACT section, we have made some amendment based on your valuable comments. We have (1) added a sentence to highlight the necessity of the research (Line 17-20), (2) descripted the changing trend of soil properties in models more specifically (Line 25-29), and (3) replaced the inaccurate statements (Line 33,36,38). We hope the revised version would be more in line with the requirements. 2. In the INTRODUCTION section, we have showed different principles and objectives of the various forest management types (Line 84-91), and our main objectives (Line 116-119) in the revised version. And also, we have deleted some incorrect words like ‘certain’. Further, some too general statements in the ‘discussion’ section were moved to this part (Line 96-99, 102-104). However, we read the first paragraph in this section, and also felt confusing. Our original intention was to emphasize the relationship among natural forests, plantation and human development. But there may have been a mistake in the language correction process, and made our statements seem illogical. We have made some corrections (Line 52) and hope to express our meaning better. But we are not sure whether the correction would meet our expectation. If it does not, we think then it can be removed. We hope a further guidance can help us from you. 3. In the MATERIAL AND METHODS section, followed your mentioned, we asked the sequencing company for a detailed workflow and made appropriate modifications (Line 152,184,191,213, 232) based on that. Thank you for pointing out our mistake. 4. In the RESULTS section, we moved statements you emphasized to the ‘DISCUSSION’ part (Line 511-513). 5. In the ‘DISCUSSION’ section, we deleted repeated results (Line 527,540-545,548,567,600) and moved some general statements (Line 499-500). 6. In addition, the wrong spellings, incorrect terms and unnecessary sentences have been correct carefully following your ‘specific comments’. 7. We replaced the reference format and put the units associated with each variable according other reviwers. Finally, please allow us once again to express our sincere gratitude to you. Since we had many disadvantages, including grammar, writing skills, data analysis, etc., we especially need reviewers like you who can provide a lot of useful suggestions. We are here to express our deeply salute to you and we will also keep your teachings in mind. Wish you all the best. Best regards, Chen, Yu.

Reviewer 3 Report

A work that adds more information to forest management, is always interesting. Soil microorganisms and fungi play a very active role in the conservation of ecosystems. The Results section has a lot of information which makes it a bit difficult to assimilate all the information.

 

Material and Methods

 

It should specify the type or types of soils present in the experimental area and the main associated characteristics

Results

 

In the text, you should put the units associated with each variable

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

    Thank you for your supports and encouragements, which provide the valuable guide-line for the revise and improvement. And also, we would like to apologize for the delay in replying. Recently, we were carrying out a field work, and the weak signal in the forest limited connection of the internet.

    In response to your valuable suggestions, we sincerely make the following explanations and revise:

1. We have added some descriptions of the soil types in the test region (L128) according to your valuable suggestion. We will also pay more attention to detail description in the future submission.
2. All data in the text has not associated with the units, which is not rigorous for a paper. Thanks for your reminding, we have added the missing information.

    Finally, please allow us once again to express our sincere gratitude to you. We are here to express our deeply salute to you and we will also keep your teachings in mind. Wish you all the best.

 

Best regards,

Chen, Yu.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

L32: higher abundance? 

Please consider English grammar check and editing. Some sentences, especially the first paragraph of the introduction, are a bit confusing. Avoid using extra long sentences which are confusing for readers. Do you think the word "managerial" is suitable in the context of forestry? Isn't better to say "model of forest management"? 

Author Response

Dear editor,

    Thank you for the further guidance. We have done our best to correct the grammatical problems and inappropriate statements according to your comments. Especially in the first paragraph, we shortened the long sentences, and tried to make it easy to understand.

    Hopefully, you would find a little improvement in this version. Thanks again!

Best regards!

Chen, Yu