Effects of CO2 and Soil Moisture Treatments on Morphological and Allometric Trait Variation in Coppiced Seedlings: A Study of Four Early-Successional Deciduous Species
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAbstract:
Line-18 significance value for height, stem, root, and leaf dry mass, and stem numbers should be mentioned
Line 23-33 the significance value and alpha level should be mentioned
Keywords: Shorten
1. Introduction:
Line 55-60 These texts should be added in methodology section.
2. Methods
Table 2. line 147 the abbreviation should be mentioned at the end of table
2.4. Statistical Analysis: This section is suggested to shorten.
Model 1 and Model 2 should be placed in Table form if feel appropriate reader understanding.
3. Results
Results of Figure 8 and 9 is repeated in table 8 with extended statistical values. Hence, suggested to remove both figures from the manuscript to avoid repetition.
Table 6 is missing, whereas table 5 and 7 seems to be less useful and the test values are suggested in text in result section. The findings of the results explained in more detail and the reader’s attention may be distracted to highlight the key findings hence suggested to curtail the text from page 16-22.
4. Discussion
The discussion in page 22-26 should be reduced to two pages.
5. References: Add some latest references
Author Response
Please see attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript reported about the impacts of CO2 and soil moisture on morphological and allometric trait variation of four deciduous species. the authors reported significant effects of plants, CO2, soil moisture treatments and their interactions on most growth traits. Though the topic of the manuscript is relevant, I think it was not well written. The manuscript should be thoroughly rewritten.
1. the abstract should be shortened and report the highlights of the study.
2. the introduction should be rewritten. For example, the main the existing problems about the effects of plant, CO2 and soil moisture on allometric growth should be included and concluded from previous studies. Line 55-Line 72 should be moved to the methods part.
3.The method is not very clear. How many replicates for each treatment? The data analysis is also hard to understand.
4. the results also should be shortened, and show the main results. Line 274-277 “Significant sources of variation and order of impact, first now genus, SMT, genus × SMT, genus × CO 2 , CO2 , genus × SMT ×CO2 , provenance, provenance × SMT, SMT × CO 2 accounting for 30.3, 18.0, 12.3, 4.8, 3.4, 1.9, 1.8, 1.5, 0.9, and 0.7% of total variation respectively (Table 3).” The data had shown in the table. Line 366“…. the ANOVA results description is not repeated here.”
5. the discussion is very similar with the results.
Comments on the Quality of English Languagethe quality of the language is OK.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
By applying combinations of treatments with early successional species, this study is the first to pioneer a fresh research approach. It also fills a vacuum in the existing literature, which is currently lacking studies that are comparable to this one. This opens up a fascinating possibility for further research and development in the sector in the present and future.
For example, the authors should not utilise acronyms like DRT, VMC, or VWC until after the meaning of the acronym has been clarified.
The authors ought to make it abundantly apparent in the introduction how they arrived at the decision to select only the four species of alder and birch that are native to North America and not any other species.
The information that is provided, as well as Table 1, does not provide a good picture of the average depth of the bulk soil samples that were gathered for this investigation.
In the event that it is feasible, Table 2 might be enhanced by including the elevation of the species that were used, unless all of the species were collected from the same elevation.
In the analytical part, there is a lack of clarification regarding whether or not there was any impact of site preparation on the growth pattern during the first year.
A lack of clarity exists in the conclusion section with regard to the practical applications that have been gained from this study. In particular, it is unclear if the emphasis is placed on the prevention of soil erosion or the promotion of soil composition upgrades.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
