Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Clarification of size range applied. Trees were correctly divided into DBH classes as DBH was measured. In comparison, DBH classes are often named according to height ("lower trees", "medium and corolla trees", "middle trees") or age ("adults", "young trees", "juveniles", "sub-adults"), but even then the naming is not uniform. Other times "smaller / big" is used.

2. Question (2) cannot be answered accurately on the basis of the study described because no sampling has been done to measure or detect allelopathic effects. The study of allelopathy should investigate secondary metabolites and their role in biological organisation and in different (plant-plant, plant-microorganism, plant-soil-plant) interactions (IAS NEWSLETTER, 1999. Allelopathy. Is this the definition we want? - International Allelopathy Society). At the same time, other important ecological factors, such as water, light, soil nutrients, soil pH, have hardly been addressed. This should be consolidated.

3. A single plot of 1 ha is a bit too small to study the spatial pattern of forest trees.

4. Species are mentioned throughout the manuscript, when in fact they are groups of species.

5. Discussion is mainly generalities and known facts, not much new is added.

More major comments:

L106: Information on the age, naturalness and history of the forest is missing. It is important to know whether this is an old-growth or a managed forest. Figure 1 suggests that this is a managed and relatively young stand, with few DBH > 30 cm trees, but it would be good to know more about this.

L122: 'We divided them into three diameters according to the DBH…' Would you prefer 'into diameters classes'?

L169: You could at least list the genera of trees. And bsal area per ha data would also be useful.

L194: This section is actually about spatial correlation between coniferous and coniferous and between broad-leaved and broad-leaved trees, not 'between coniferous and broad-leaved species'.

L2106: 'The smaller was the age gap between coniferous and broad-leaved trees, the stronger was the negative correlation of spatial scale.' – How can you know that there is an age gap when only DBH was measured?

L222-224: 'Small scale' is sometimes <4 m, other times <30 m, but also <10 m (L219). It should be used more consistently.

L244: 'Diameter classes' would be better instead of 'diameter stages'.

L379: 'the scarcity of shrubs and herbs in the lower forest levels likely led to the decline of overall stand productivity and degradation of forest land fertility' - Why is that? - this could be a result, not a reason for further reduction. A gap forms and the cover of the lower layers can increase.

L390: 'large diameter individuals' would be better instead of 'large diameter species'.

L391: I do not know, what does „small path plants” mena.

395-397: '…the whole community was evolving in a complex direction of species richness.' Please, rewrite this section.

The captions on the diagrams are very small.

Minor comments:

L43: 'Space' is missing after  'species';

L46: 'Space' is missing before 'as';

L49: 'Space' is missing after 'et al. ';    

L165: 'Space' is missing before '756';

L183: Start a sentence with a capital letter.;

L194: 'Evergreen' instead of 'evergreen';

L220: Start a sentence with a capital letter.;

L224: Start a sentence with a capital letter.;

L237: 'Space' is missing after '15';

L248: Start a sentence with a capital letter.;

L267: Start a sentence with a capital letter.;

L268: 'Space' is missing after '40';

L277: 'Space' is missing after '5';

L322: 'Space' is missing before 'and';

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors reveal the interrelations between coniferous and broad-leaved species in the mixed forests and answer the questions on spatial distribution of species in the mixed forests and whether allelopathy could limit their regeneration and growth unravelling the role of competition and facilitation in species coexistence and stability of forest communities. However, the idea of competition between coniferous and broad-leaved species is not so new. How plant competition contributes to plant spatial distribution patterns and community assembly during forest succession is a classic and cutting-edge scientific topic in research on plant community ecology (see, e.g., DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4592, 2018; https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0762-2, 2018; DOI 10.1007/s13595-017-0624-3, 2017; https://doi.org/10.2307/3237309, 1999; also, Legendre, P., Fortin, M.J., 1989. Spatial pattern and ecological analysis. Plant Ecol. 80 (2), 107e138. Similar study, but of evergreen and deciduous species was performed by Haonan Zhang et al. (publication “How evergreen and deciduous trees coexist during secondary forest succession: Insights into forest restoration mechanisms in Chinese subtropical forest”), where authors also based on differences in DBH within communities of deciduous and evergreen species of the different density but did not touch coniferous ones

Simultaneously, some additional comments should be emphasized.

In the sector of Results, author indicated the numbers of trees (Line 15) while this information is more suitable for the sector of Material and Method. As to spatial distribution, ecologists most use the term "clumped distribution" instead of "aggregation" one (Lines 175-184)

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

In my opinion the manuscript has been somewhat corrected. All that remains are a few of my earlier comments, for which I have not received any reflection.

5. Discussion is mainly generalities and known facts, not much new is added.

It has not been substantially rewritten, only the allelopathy part has been deleted.

6. L106: Information on the age, naturalness and history of the forest is missing. It is important to know whether this is an old-growth or a managed forest. Figure 1 suggests that this is a managed and relatively young stand, with few DBH > 30 cm trees, but it would be good to know more about this.

No reply to the above comment.

15. L391: I do not know, what does „small path plants” mean?

No reply to the above comment.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf