Seedling Morphological Characteristics on Survival, Uniformity, and Growth during a Full Short Rotation in Eucalyptus grandis x E. urophylla Plantation
and José Leonardo de Moraes Gonçalves 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Paper "Seedling Morphological Characteristics on Survival, Uniformity, and Growth during a full short rotation in Eucalyptus grandis x E. urophylla Plantation" carries out investigations with important potential in the successful cultivation of Eucalyptus species. However, the experimental part requires an improvement of the presentation and additional explanations for the paper to be published.
Row 116: Please explain what you mean by "The treatments were defined by morphological parameters". Why did you name the variants of seedlings with different morphological properties "Treatments"? "Treatment" would have been if you treated the investigated material with different substances - but I understand from the paper that this is not the case.
Chapter 2.2 Experimental Design - it is absolutely necessary to specify exactly the origin of the 4 variants A, B, C and D - I understand from the title that it is Eucalyptus hybrids E. grandis x E. urophylla, but this is not specified in the Material and Methods and, likewise, the full description and identification of variants A, B, C and D is not specified.
Row 121 - For what reasons do you consider the results obtained on variants A, B and C to be comparable with those obtained on variant D, since this fine trace stayed in the nursery for 180 days? Can morphological parameters be compared in seedlings with an almost double growth period compared to the others?
In the Discussion Chapter I notice that you often refer to a study on the survival of Pinus seddlings. However, the species of Eucaliptus and Pinus are quite different from each other, from a taxonomic point of view and, implicitly, from the point of view of the physiological and adaptive response. Do you not consider it more appropriate to compare the results obtained with some from a species closer to Eucalyptus?
rows 329-332: please review the statements and references on paper 42 - suberification does not necessarily prevent water absorption - it is a way of protecting the root, which occurs at the level of the exoderm; but the root hairs region still can absorb the water. Again, the physiological aspects of absorption may differ in gymnosperms compared to angiosperms (that's why the comparison with Pinus species is not the most appropriate).
Minor observations:
Row 54 - Eucalyptus grandis - with italics
Row 57 - Eucalyptus and Corymbia - with italics; please check the rest of the manuscript.
Figure 1 - the title is not clear.
Row 276 - Discussions - it's Chapter 4.
Row 282 - the authors must be mentioned before the reference 32 - South et al.
I encountered no problems in understanding the paper, from the perspective of the English language.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
1. “The plots were represented by 49 plants (9 x 9 individuals)” How many plants were there?
2. “These seedlings remained in the greenhouse for 30 days and after that period were transferred to the shade house, where they remained for another seven days. After this period, the seedlings were directed to the growing area with full light exposure where they remained until the expedition phase, for planting under field conditions.”
What cultivation parameters have been determined? Air and soil temperature, air and soil humidity, lighting intensity?
In my opinion, the authors should have brought the conditions of growing seedlings as close as possible to field conditions.
In this case, it would be possible to determine the parameters of the most adapted seedlings that can potentially survive in the field.
Author Response
- “The plots were represented by 49 plants (9 x 9 individuals)” How many plants were there?
Answer: we are sorry we confounded the number of plants, and corrected to the real number. The sentence now is: “The plots were represented by 81 plants (9 rows x 9 plants), with a useful area containing 25 plants in the central region of the plots (5 rows x 5 plants)”
- “These seedlings remained in the greenhouse for 30 days and after that period were transferred to the shade house, where they remained for another seven days. After this period, the seedlings were directed to the growing area with full light exposure where they remained until the expedition phase, for planting under field conditions.”
What cultivation parameters have been determined? Air and soil temperature, air and soil humidity, lighting intensity?
In my opinion, the authors should have brought the conditions of growing seedlings as close as possible to field conditions.
In this case, it would be possible to determine the parameters of the most adapted seedlings that can potentially survive in the field.
The conditions of growing seedlings in most of time is determined by the region´s climate, which is already described in “Area description” session. We can say seedlings are well adapted to the regional climate conditions, as they remain in an open area called “growing area” for 60 days at the last phase in the nursery until the expedition to the field.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please find my reply attached - new comments are highlighted in red.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
I had no problems with understanding the text, from the point of view of the English language.
Author Response
We thank your precious comments to improve our research.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Determining the quality of seedlings at an early stage is a very interesting and important task. I wish you success!
Author Response
Thanks for your work of reviewing our manuscript and considering it as read to be published.
Regards.
