Effect of Stand Density on Soil Organic Carbon Storage and Extracellular Enzymes Activity of Larch Plantation in Northeast China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

[Forests] Manuscript ID: forests-2483911
Review Report

The study mainly focused on the effect of stand density on SOC storage, larch plantations with 3 different stand density were chosen. Soil properties were measures in 3 soil layers which are 0-20 cm, 20-40 cm and 40-60 cm. An incubation experiment with 14C labeled cellulose addition was subsequently conducted to study the decomposition of SOC and cellulose, as well as the enzymes activity involved in nutrients cycle. It’s a good research work related to Extracellular enzymatic and Microbial suppression activities in SOC in three different density of larch plantation.” But need a comprehensive revision in the manuscript. Following are the comments and suggestions made for the authors’ revisions.

Comments and Suggestions:

1.       it should be better if the title of the research is something like “Extracellular enzyme and Microbial suppression activities in SOM or SOC in three different density of larch plantation.”

2.       your objectives and focus of novelty are effect of stand density on SOC, Positive or negative? while your result mostly focused on Extracellular enzyme and Microbial suppression activities. In such case you need to do a comprehensive field measurement data and find out a direct relation between Stand Density and other soil stoichiometry (N, P, K etc.).

3.       in lines 33-35, you mentioned that “We proposed that the effects of stand density on SOC storage in the larch plantations could possibly be related to the suppression of soil microbial activity.” It means that your results and finding not exactly shows a clear decision that “stand density can affect the SOC.” Because if this is your final findings, and you proposed some relevancy to other factors or some other activities, so it’s not those scientific results, which should be expected here, as a novel work to be published in this journal.

4.       In line 43, instead of artificial forest, its better to use “Plantation Forest”.

5.       Lines 48-51, the English paraphrase is not that good, you can rephrase it, also double check the whole manuscript and check it by the native English speaker.

6.       The results are not well explanatory.

7.       The figures are not well standard and self-explanatory.

8.       The Discussion section needs supporting results of other studies, you need to review other similar studies, and strengthened your discussion, current form is not that good, such as:

  Variation of carbon density components with overstory structure of larch plantations in northwest China and its implication for optimal forest management

9.       Your study lacking limitation of your study in the last of discussion section.

10.   Your manuscript lacking conclusion section of your study.

The English paraphrase is not that good, you can rephrase it, also double check the whole manuscript and check it by the native English speaker.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript with the comments and suggestions. Those are helpful for improving our manuscript. We have revised the manuscript and responded to your comments. Please see the attachment.

Best Regards

Xudong

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

forests-2483911: This paper is nicely prepared, some points must be improved as below.  

1) Introduction: How 14C-labeled cellulose is important for change of SOC? Please elaborate more details because there is no mentioning about it.  

2) Lines 128-129: What is the basic science of collecting soil samples at the depth of 60 cm in larch plantations?  

3) Line 124: “(Tab. 1)” should be “(Table 1)”. Please revise throughout manuscript.   

4) Figure 2 should be changed the symbol of bar charts.  

5) Lines 323-326: This sentence needs the references and finding from the previous studies.   

6) Lines 331-337: There are no discussion about the relationship between extracellular enzymes and soil properties. For example, β-glucosidase is an important enzyme for the decomposition. A study found β-glucosidase level positively correlated with the soil total nitrogen. Please see these studies. [Effect of Rice Straw and Stubble Burning on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Bacterial Communities in Central Thailand. Biology 2023, 12(4), 501.] [Evaluation of β-Glucosidase Activity as a Soil Quality Indicator for the Soil Management Assessment Framework. Soil Sci. Am. J. 2010, 74, 107–119.].  

7) Lines 346-347: “…but we missed the observation as the added cellulose is fast consumed if N is rich.”. It is difficult to understand.   

8) Lines 349-350: Why was not energy rich?  

9) Line 400: What kind of low sensitivity to environment?

10) Conclusion is missing.

-

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript with the comments and suggestions. Those are helpful for improving our manuscript. We have revised the manuscript and responded to your comments. Please see the attachment.

Best Regards

Xudong

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Accept in present form.

-