Next Article in Journal
Comparing Negative Impacts of Prunus serotina, Quercus rubra and Robinia pseudoacacia on Native Forest Ecosystems
Next Article in Special Issue
Shifts in Climate–Growth Relationships of Sky Island Pines
Previous Article in Journal
Adaptation Capacity of Norway Spruce Provenances in Western Latvia
Open AccessArticle
Peer-Review Record

Thermal Time and Cardinal Temperatures for Germination of Cedrela odorata L.

Forests 2019, 10(10), 841; https://doi.org/10.3390/f10100841
Reviewer 1: Arthur I. Novikov
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Forests 2019, 10(10), 841; https://doi.org/10.3390/f10100841
Received: 21 August 2019 / Revised: 19 September 2019 / Accepted: 24 September 2019 / Published: 26 September 2019

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The direction of research is undoubtedly relevant in the light of climate change.

However, clarification of the main points is required.

These comments are provided in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article describes the germination characteristics of Cedrela odorata. Important technical aspects and concepts need to be better described. In the conclusions the authors state that Cedrela odorata has an unusual wide range of cardinal temperatures, but the cardinal temperatures of other species are not indicated nor discussed. Only the case of germination of Pinus contorta seeds at high temperatures is mentioned.

The discussion is poor. It lacks data from other species and and contain many trivial sentences.

 

In the introduction a definition for cardinal temperatures is required.

At the beginning of the materials and methods section please describe seed morphology and variation in seed shape and size and provide seed images.

2.1. Seed collection

Important details are missing related to seed collection. For example: How were the seeds collected: From the trees, from the soil, manually, mechanically, at what time of the year? How many seeds? Date of collection? Age of the seeds at the time germination testing?

Line 113: What does it mean A cut test: A cut test was under taken to the seeds to check viability.

Line 134: Delete Germination rate.

Line 141. Delete Base temperature (Tb). Explain better this concept:

It represents the time for germination that is calculated in percentiles, in 10% intervals, for all temperature treatments.

Define and explain the meaning of β0.

Line 148: Delete Upper threshold temperature (Tc).

Line 154: Delete Optimal temperature (To).

Line 157-170: Please explain better this paragraph and the meaning of  ?1. Also explain better the paragraph on lines 171-174 and the meaning of ?2.  

Lines 203, 212 and 219 please write coherently and explain the meaning of each number in the parentheses:

There was a significant effect of temperature on the germination percent (F 8, 36 49.82 p<0.02).

The time required for 50% of the seeds to germinate was significantly different among temperature treatments (F 8, 36 112.34; p<0.0001).

The germination rate differed significantly among temperatures (F 8,36 =28.13; p<0.001).

Line 292 change specie to species

Line 293 check the word brinding.

Line 306: Explain in the context of this article or delete:

According to Baskin and Baskin [47], selective pressure increases establishment success in increasingly uncertain environments

Line 319 change hasta for to

Line 326 Explain or delete:

These findings are consistent with Caroca et al. [49], who are showed that the optimal temperature occurs when the germination rate is highest over.

Also the following seems trivial. Explain or delete these sentences:

Adam et al. [48] and Grey et al. [52] indicate that the germination rate increases with temperature, but when the very high temperatures occurs there is a decrease in the germination rate, specifically at the intersection where the optimal germination temperature is found. Temperature is related to the number of seeds germinated per day, thus, in those temperatures below and above the optimal temperature, the germination rate decreases.

Line 362 Delete are

Line 394: Change calculated to observed in:

odorata showed a high germinative potential in response to temperature, so that an unusual wide range of cardinal temperatures were calculated.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

See file attached

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript has been revised according to the point notes. Despite some controversial issues, I believe that readers will be more interesting to read the revised version of the manuscript.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1, Round 2

Again, we thank you for your suggestions, with witch, this manuscript has a significant improvement in its format and presentation of information, to make it more understandable and interesting to the readers.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Line 98 Change dehiscens for dehiscence

Line 188 Please complete:

data were transformed into probits. range, R2 values were highest and residual variances were 188 smallest when Probit values were expressed as a function of ?1 (sub-optimal thermal time).

Line 231: Figure 2. The experimental united: Change to experimental unit

Line 345 Change increases to increase

Line 364: Still not clear:

These findings are consistent with Caroca et al. [50], who showed that the optimal temperature occurs at higer germination rate

(please correct higer to higher)

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2, Round 2

We thank you for your suggestions and corrections to the manuscript, all of them greatly contribute to the significant improvement of this article.

All suggested changes were made in the description of the methods. Likewise, the description in Figure 2 was modified and the edits suggested in the discussion were made.

Additionally, a detailed review of the manuscript was made by one of the native  English Language co-autors.

Again, we thank you for you suggestions, with which, this manuscript has a significant improvement in its format and presentation of information, to make it more understandable and interesting to the readers.  

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

 

Reviewer 3 Report

No further comments

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3, Round 2

We thank you for your suggestions and corrections to the manuscript in the Round 1, all of them greatly contribute to the significant improvement of this article.

A detailed review of the manuscript was made by one of the native English Language co-authors.

Again, we thank you for your suggestions, with which, this manuscript has a significant improvement in its format and presentation of information, to make it more understandable and interesting to the readers.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop