Early Growth Characterization and C:N:P Stoichiometry in Firmiana simplex Seedlings in Response to Shade and Soil Types

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript “Early Growth Characterization and C:N:P Stoichiometry in Firmiana Simplex Seedling in Response to Shade and Soil types” is interesting and under the scope of the journal ‘FORESTS.’ However, the Title, Abstract, Introduction, and Methodology section need improvement. Briefly, the MS needs major revisions before possible acceptance in the ‘FORESTS’ journal.

Title                          

Line 2-3: In the title, the scientific name of the species ‘Firmiana Simplex’ should be replaced with ‘Firmiana simplex’.

Abstract

1-      Kick-start the abstract by highlighting the importance of reported work. Briefly discuss the methods used and then discuss key results.

2-      Key words must be rewritten and arranged alphabetically to enhance the visibility of your article.

Introduction

The Introduction needs to improve by incorporating this information into the Introduction:

1-      What will benefit the scientific community/society of your study?

2-      What is the significance of your research?

3-      Please clarify and refine your hypothesis.

4-      Line 37-39: Please replace this sentence ‘However, plants have evolved complex adaptations that allow them to cope with adverse light conditions, such as morphological and physiological plasticity, nutrient and metabolic adjustments throughout their whole lifetime, especially during the early stages [2,8].’ With ‘‘However, plants evolved different adaptations to survive in adverse light and environmental conditions (https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9080990, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2022.153671), such as morphological and physiological plasticity, nutrient and metabolic adjustments throughout their whole lifetime, especially during the early stages [2,8].”

Materials and Methods

1-      Line 127: Please provide the coordinates and pictures of the experimental site with the study flowchart.

2-      Line 137: Please delete ‘, and were deposited’

3-      Line 138: Please delete ‘until using’

4-      In 2.2. Experimental Material: you didn’t mention how you collected soil samples and the depth you considered. What were the criteria for collecting these samples?

5-      How do you measure the soil pH, SOC, BD, TN, TP, and TK?

6-      Moreover, in methods, the measurement of C, N, and P was too coarse (Line 176-181). Please provide more information on how C, N, and P were measured and how sites were selected for sampling. Please incorporate this information in the Materials and Methods section.

Results

Figures 3 and 4 are unclear. Please redraw these figures.

Line 348-353: Please delete this part. ‘Redundancy analysis (RDA) is a sequencing method combining regression analysis with principal component analysis, which can analyze the effects of environmental factors on different species. In this study, response variable matrix was established by the data of growth parameters and stoichiometry characteristics under different shade and soil types, and the environmental factors of shade and soil nutrients were taken as explanatory variables.’

Discussion

The discussion about RDA is shallow.

Conclusions

Line 532-551: It is more unspecific, so obviously the Conclusions need to be rewritten carefully, and it should reflect the synthesis of your key results.

References

References are too many; therefore, I recommend that shouldn’t exceed the limit of 50.

Hopefully, these suggestions will help you to improve your Article.

 

Good luck!

 Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

We are grateful to you for your suggestions, and incorporate your comments, which contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript. The text in the revised manuscript has been corrected and/or rewrite as suggested. We have tried to highlight our corrections in red in the revised manuscript. Title Line 2-3: In the title, the scientific name of the species ‘Firmiana Simplex’should be replaced with ‘Firmiana simplex’. Reply: Thanks, we have revised error as your suggestion (line 3). Abstract 1- Kick-start the abstract by highlighting the importance of reported work. Briefly discuss the methods used and then discuss key results. Reply: Ok. We appreciate the reviewer’s comments, and have revised these in the Abstract section as suggested. 2- Key words must be rewritten and arranged alphabetically to enhance the visibility of your article. Reply: Ok. Thank you for the professional comments, we have revised the key words in the revised manuscript as suggested. Introduction The Introduction needs to improve by incorporating this information into the Introduction: 1- What will benefit the scientific community/society of your study? Reply: Ok. We appreciate the reviewer’s comments, and have added the benefits of this study in the revised manuscript as your suggestion. 2- What is the significance of your research? Reply: Ok. We appreciate the reviewer’s comments, and we have modified and highlighted the importance of this study in the revised manuscript. The significance of our studies was listed as followed: (1) C, N, and P contents and their ratios had scaling relationships in F. simplex seedlings. Shade and soil types as well as their interactions significantly influenced the growth parameters and dynamic balance of nutrients in F. simplex seedlings. (2) There was N limitation in F. simplex seedlings in response to different soil types. C, N, and P contents and their stoichiometry in F. simplex seedlings supported the growth rate hypothesis. 3- Please clarify and refine your hypothesis. Reply: Ok. Thank you for professional comments, and we have revised these details in the revised manuscript as suggested. 4- Line 37-39: Please replace this sentence ‘However, plants have evolved complex adaptations that allow them to cope with adverse light conditions, such as morphological and physiological plasticity, nutrient and metabolic adjustments throughout their whole lifetime, especially during the early stages [2,8].’ With ‘‘However, plants evolved different adaptations to survive in adverse light and environmental conditions (https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9080990, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2022.153671), such as morphological and physiological plasticity, nutrient and metabolic adjustments throughout their whole lifetime, especially during the early stages [2,8].” Reply: Ok. We agree. We thank the reviewer and have revised the sentence in the revised manuscript as suggested. Materialsand Methods 1- Line 127: Please provide the coordinates and pictures of the experimental site with the study flowchart. Reply: OK. Thanks. We had added the detail description on the study site in the Chapter of materials and methods in the revised manuscript as suggested. 2- Line 137: Please delete ‘, and were deposited’ Reply: Ok. We agree with the reviewer, and we have deleted in the revised manuscript as suggested. 3- Line 138: Please delete ‘until using’ Reply: Ok. We have followed the recommendations of the reviewer, and we have deleted in the revised manuscript as suggested. 4- In 2.2. Experimental Material:you didn’t mention how you collected soil samples and the depth you considered. What were the criteria for collecting these samples? Reply: Ok. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s comments. According to the reviewer’s comment, we have added the related description in the revised manuscript as suggested. 5- How do you measure the soil pH, SOC, BD, TN, TP, and TK? Reply: Ok. We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s comments. According to the reviewer’s comment, we have added the relevant measurement methods in the revised manuscript as suggested. 6- Moreover, in methods, the measurement of C, N, and P was too coarse (Line 176-181). Please provide more information on how C, N, and P were measured and how sites were selected for sampling. Please incorporate this information in the Materials and Methods section. Reply: Ok. We are grateful for reviewer’s professional comment. We have added related description in the methods in the revised manuscript as suggested. Results Figures 3 and 4 are unclear. Please redraw these figures. Reply: Ok. We agree with the reviewer, and have redrew these figures and replaced it in the revised manuscript as suggested. Line 348-353: Please delete this part. ‘Redundancy analysis (RDA) is a sequencing method combining regression analysis with principal component analysis, which can analyze the effects of environmental factors on different species. In this study, response variable matrix was established by the data of growth parameters and stoichiometry characteristics under different shade and soil types, and the environmental factors of shade and soil nutrients were taken as explanatory variables.’ Reply: Ok. Thanks. We agree with the Reviewer and have removed this part of the sentence from the manuscript. Discussion The discussion about RDA is shallow. Reply: Ok. We thank the reviewer for the comment and we have discussed in more depth in the Discussion section in the revised manuscript as suggested. Conclusions Line 532-551: It is more unspecific, so obviously the Conclusions need to be rewritten carefully, and it should reflect the synthesis of your key results. Reply: Ok. Thanks. We agree with the reviewer’s comments and have also amended the conclusion in the revised manuscript as suggested. References References are too many; therefore, I recommend that shouldn’t exceed the limit of 50. Reply: Ok. We appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comment. We have deleted some references from 69 to 50 and the citation was comprehensively revised in the revised manuscript as suggested.

Reviewer 2 Report

Abstract in its present form is not informative enough regarding quantitative data.

Taxonomic names of the soils used must be given. 

Objectives: Why is important to study shading for a developing species? And equally important what conclusions can be drawn about stoichiometry since it will be different for the mature plants.

Referring to soils using color coding is not acceptable. 

The manuscript is too long for a 45-day study and should should be shortened.

Several comments were made on the manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We are grateful to you for your suggestions, and incorporate your comments, which contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript. The text in the revised manuscript has been corrected and/or rewrite as suggested. We have tried to highlight our corrections in red in the revised manuscript. Abstract in its present form is not informative enough regarding quantitative data. Reply: Ok. Thanks. We appreciate the reviewer’s comment, and we have added the quantitative data in the in the Abstract section in the revised manuscript as suggested. Referring to soils using color coding is not acceptable.Taxonomic names of the soils used must be given. Reply: Ok. We appreciate the reviewer’s comment. We have revisited relevant materials. According to the China soil classification systems, these soil types used in this experiment were classified as acid purple soil, red soil and yellow soil, respectively. Objectives: Why is important to study shading for a developing species? And equally important what conclusions can be drawn about stoichiometry since it will be different for the mature plants. Reply: Ok. We agree with the reviewer’s comment and have revised the objectives of this study in the revised manuscript as suggested. The manuscript is too long for a 45-day study and should be shortened. Reply: Ok. We appreciate the reviewer’s comment. We have revised and shortened the manuscript where appropriate as reviewer’s suggestion. Several comments were made on the manuscript. Reply: Ok. We appreciate reviewer’s comments, and we have revised the comments in the revised manuscript as suggested. Comments on the Quality of English Language Reply: Ok. Thanks. The text of the whole paper has been revised, and the language was improved by a native speaker as suggested.

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript examines how shade and soil type affect F. simplex seedling growth, C:N:P stoichiometry responses, and nutrient use efficiency. The manuscript is very well written, and the tables and figures are very informative. The results are clear to the reader, and the Discussion is comprehensive and focuses on the main points of the findings of the study. The results are well justified and supported by the relevant literature. Please add explanations for soil types (B1.., B2… B3…) in Table 2 as in Table 1. This work can be considered for publication.

Author Response

We are grateful to you for your suggestions, and incorporate your comments, which contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript. The text in the revised manuscript has been corrected and/or rewrite as suggested. We have tried to highlight our corrections in red in the revised manuscript. Please add explanations for soil types (B1.., B2… B3…) in Table 2 as in Table 1. This work can be considered for publication. Reply: Ok. Thanks. We agree with the reviewer and we have added the explanations on soil types in the revised manuscript as suggested.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you to the authors for their meticulous revisions based on my comments/suggestions, addressing them one by one. I have no further comments at this time. I believe that, with these modifications, the manuscript is now ready for publication. I also appreciate the opportunity given to me to review this work.

Author Response

Reply: Ok. We are grateful to you for your suggestions, and incorporate your comments, which contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript. The text in the revised manuscript has been corrected and/or rewrite as suggested. We have tried to highlight our corrections in red in the revised manuscript. Thanks.

Reviewer 2 Report

Manuscript was significantly improved but I insist on the following matter:

The current Chinese Soil Taxonomy systems IS NOT USING colors to classify soils!!! Therefore, I insist the proper classification to be used.

There are several publications, among them a chapter how the Chinese Soil Classification system was developed. Therefore, with a little help the proper classification can be used.

Also, I presume that the authors are interested their work be read by the international community who work on the same subject and would like to compare their results with similar or different soils and would like to know the soil taxonomy for interpreting their results.  

From the other side it’s not fair for all those Chinese soil scientist who developed the Chinese Soil Classification system their work not be acknowledged by fellow Chinese scientists.

Author Response

Reply: Ok. We are grateful to you for your suggestions, and incorporate your comments, which contributed greatly to the improvement of our manuscript. The text in the revised manuscript has been corrected and/or rewrite as suggested. We have tried to highlight our corrections in red in the revised manuscript. In fact, the standard of soils classification did not used the colors of soil according to the China soil classification systems and published studies. In China, the main types of soil can be summarized as red soil, brown soil, Cinnamon oil, black soil, chestnut soil, desert soil, tidal soil (including sand ginger black soil), irrigated soil, paddy soil, wet soil (meadow, swamp soil), saline alkali soil, lithological soil, and alpine soil, etc. (Shi et al., 2004; Shi et al., 2006a,b; Yang et al., 2007; Yu et al., 2007). Acid purple soil, yellow soil and red soil are three most common zonal soil types, and had been used in some studies and reported. Red soil (RS) is one of most common zonal soil types in tropical and subtropical regions of China, accounting for 6.4% of land area in China. It is characterized by a red, acid and highly unsaturated iron-alumina-enriched type as a result of desiliconization and aluminum enrichment. Yellow soil (YS), accounting for 3.6% of land area of China, is a typical acidic soil formed in the subtropical warm and wet climate areas, which is widely distributed in mountainous region and plateau in Yunnan, Hunan, Sichuan and Fujian in China. Acid purple soil is a special soil type in China, and is mainly distributed in Sichuan Basin, Yunnan, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Fujian, Jiangsu, etc. (He et al., 1983; Zhang et al. 2014; Yang et al., 2020). The three soil types belong to the sub-type of soils, and may be found in the list of China soil classification systems and Classification and codes for Chinese soil (GBT17296-2009). In the chapter of Materials and Methods, there may be a misunderstanding on our description of used soil types. Thus, we had rewrite these description of three soil types as suggested. Thank you for advices. List of some references He, X.; Lu, Y.G.; Zhang, J.; Liu, K. Effects of soil types on potato and cadmium accumulation and transport characteristics under cadmium stress. Earth and Environ. 2023, 51(1), 87-101. He, X.; Xie, W.; Deng, S.;et al. The achievements and problems when improving and utilizing red and yellow soils in China. Chin J Soil Sci 1983, 2, 1-4. Lu, Y.; Hua, Y.; Lv, N.; Zu, W.; Kronzucker, H.J.; Dong, G.; Shi, W. Syringic acid from rice roots inhibits soil nitrification and N2O emission under red and paddy soils but not a calcareous soil. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1099689. Shi, X.; Yu, D.; Sun W.; Wang H.; Zhao Q.; Gong Z. Reference benchmarks relating to great groups of genetic soil classification of China with soil taxonomy.Chin Sci Bull 2004, 49, 1507-1511. Shi, X.Z.; Dong-Sheng, Y.U.; Yang, G.X.; et al. Cross-reference benchmarks for translating the genetic soil classification of China into the Chinese soil taxonomy. Pedosphere 2006a, 16, 7. Shi, X.Z.; Yu, D.S.; Warner, E.D.; Sun, W.X.; Petersen, G.W.; Gong, Z.T. Cross-reference system for translating between genetic soil classification of China and soil taxonomy. Soil Sci. Soc Am. J. 2006b, 70, 78-83. Yang, G.; Shi, X.; Yu, D.; Wang, H.; Sun, W.; Zhao, Y.; Jin, Y.A WebGIS-based inquiry system for reference between Genetic Soil Classification of China and Chinese soil taxonomy. Acta Pedologica Sinica 2007, 44(1), 1-6. Yang, S.; Shi, J.; Chen, L.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, D.; Xu, Z.; Xiao, J.; Zhu, P.; Liu, Y.; et al. Physiological and biomass partitioning shifts to water stress under distinct soil types in Populus deltoides saplings. J. Plant Ecol., 2020, 13, 545-553. Yu, D.; Shi, X.; Wang, H.; Sun, W.; Warner, E.D.; Liu, Q. National scale analysis of soil organic carbon storage in china based on Chinese soil taxonomy. Pedosphere 2007, 17(1), 11-18. Zhang, M.; Liu, Y.; Wei, Q.; Gu, X.; Liu, L.; Gou, J. Biochar application ameliorated the nutrient content and fungal community structure in different yellow soil depths in the karst area of Southwest China. Front. Plant Sci .2022, 13, 1020832. Zhang, W.; Liu, C.Q.; Wang, Z.L.;et al. Speciation and isotopic composition of sulfur in limestone soil and yellow soil in karst areas of southwest china: implications of different responses to acid deposition. J. Environ. Qual. 2014, 43, 809-819.