Response of Soil Aggregate Composition and Stability to Secondary Succession and Plantation of a Broad-Leaved Korean Pine Forest after Clear-Cutting and Its Causes
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The present work introduces an interesting dataset that examines the impact of various restoration strategies and secondary succession sequences on the stability of forest soil aggregates subsequent to clear cutting. This study offers valuable insights into the interconnections between soil organic carbon and humus components, soil water-stable aggregates, and soil mechanical aggregates. The manuscript exhibits a comprehensive scope and is written in a satisfactory manner. The elucidation of the "Materials and Methods" section provides valuable information, while the "Results" section has been duly validated using rigorous statistical analysis. The statistics and tables provide valuable information. The manuscript has a considerable degree of written competence and offers a comprehensive and exhaustive analysis. Minor modifications are proposed with respect to the formatting of certain references within the text. As an example, in Line 71, Dou et al….. the absence of citation information is evident. The manuscript has possible suitability for publication.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your comments on my paper, so that it can be greatly improved. The following is my answer to every question：
In Line 71, Dou et al….. the absence of citation information is evident.
Answer：The reference to this part is number 25.
Best wishes
Yafei Wang
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript "Response of soil aggregate composition and stability to secondary succession and plantation of a broad-leaved Korean pine forest after clear-cutting: A comparative study of artificial afforestation and natural restoration" submitted for review requires additional corrections. In its current form, I do not recommend it for publication in the Forests journal.
The title does not match the content. The authors not only assessed the impact of forest succession type after clear cutting of a tree plants. They assessed many other features i.a.: water parameters, soil physical properties and tree species diversity, litter production and other parameters. I suggest changing the title of manuscript to more related to the manuscript text.
Manuscript has a many editorial shortcomings. Before submission need additional correction.
What was described by "Turcotte" line 63. This name (surname) is not explained in the text and there is no such item in the reference list.
Line 64. Yang Peilling remarks as above
Line 119. ... temperature in the range of -0.3-1.2oC ... What period does this value refer to?
Line 120-125. This part should not be included in the text my opinion.
Line 137 probably instead cone should be crone
No explanation what does mean Slope direction (table 1).
Why crone density has a two different value (table 1 and table 2).
Equation 1 How timber volume per plot estimated?
Lines 169-170 Please correct total number of samples. If, 5 quadrats were set in each plot, and 15 quadrats were set in each forest type, there were not 45 but 75 in total.
Line 190
Line 202 chemical compound formula was wrong
Line 206 as above
Lines 246-258 The manuscript part is difficult to connect with the data presented in Figure 2. I suggest a text changes in this part of manuscript.
Lines 262-282 The manuscript part is difficult to connect with the data presented in Figure 3. I suggest a text changes in this part of manuscript.
The quality of figures and picture in table 6 and 7 is low and I recommend improving.
Line 304, 347, 370, 390 Usually in the text first refers to the data contained in tables or figures, and then materials are included. I suggest a correction.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your comments on my paper, so that it can be greatly improved. The following is my answer to every question：
- What was described by "Turcotte" line 63. This name (surname) is not explained in the text and there is no such item in the reference list.
Answer：References have been added.
“Turcotte, D. L .Fractals and fragmentation[J].Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth, 1986, 91(B2):1921-1926.DOI:10.1029/JB091iB02p01921.”
（2）Line 64. Yang Peilling remarks as above
Answer： They are indeed a literature.
（3）Line 119. ... temperature in the range of -0.3-1.2oC ... What period does this value refer to?
Answer：This section has been removed and reorganized.
- Line 120-125. This part should not be included in the text my opinion.
Answer：This section has been removed and reorganized
- Line 137 probably instead cone should be crone
Answer：Growth cone is a tool for extracting tree core in tree-ring method.
- No explanation what does mean Slope direction (table 1).
Answer：Slope direction is defined as the direction of the projection of the slope normal on the horizontal plane. Because it is only a background index of a plot, it is not easy for readers to understand, so it is deleted.
- Why crone density has a two different value (table 1 and table 2).
Answer：Table 1 is the actual canopy density and Table 2 is the standard of sample selection. The crone density of table 1 is deleted.
- Equation 1 How timber volume per plot estimated?
Answer：Calculate by the investigated DBH tree height combined with binary volume table. Supplemented in text.
- Lines 169-170 Please correct total number of samples. If, 5 quadrats were set in each plot, and 15 quadrats were set in each forest type, there were not 45 but 75 in total.
Answer：I have corrected this mistake.
- Line 190
Answer：There is no specific question here.
- Line 202 chemical compound formula was wrong
Answer：Line 202 only have “soil organic carbon”
- Line 206 as above
Answer：Line 206 only have “sodium pyrophosphate-sodium hydroxide”
- Lines 246-258 The manuscript part is difficult to connect with the data presented in Figure 2. I suggest a text changes in this part of manuscript.
Answer：：It is explained at introduction(line 56) that > 0.25 mm is macroaggregate and < 0.25 mm is microaggregate.
- Lines 262-282 The manuscript part is difficult to connect with the data presented in Figure 3. I suggest a text changes in this part of manuscript.
Answer：It is explained at introduction(line 56) that > 0.25 mm is macroaggregate and < 0.25 mm is microaggregate.
- The quality of figures and picture in table 6 and 7 is low and I recommend improving.
Answer：The above picture has been optimized.
- Line 304, 347, 370, 390 Usually in the text first refers to the data contained in tables or figures, and then materials are included. I suggest a correction.
Answer：The results of this part are all based on the conclusions drawn from the above charts, which may be due to the lack of numerical description. Therefore, each part is supplemented.
- The title does not match the content.
Answer：The title has been changed to “Response of soil aggregate composition and stability to secondary succession and plantation of a broad-leaved Korean pine forest after clear-cutting an its causes”
Best wishes
Yafei Wang
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Analysis of the possible combinations of natural reforestation after artificial deforestation concerning the soil composition is essential. The authors presented a very nice idea. The methodology is well-defined. The literature review gives a strong base for defining the methodology in the paper.
I am proposing a major revision.
After several paper readings, the conclusion section should be more robust. There has yet to be an actual decision about the obtained variants. I am proposing the application of the Multicriteria methods to fulfill this request. For example, Promethee would be quite acceptable, mainly because all input data are prepared.
Second, the figures are blurry. It is tough to read the values from them.
Authors should enclose a map of the analyzed location.
Small typo and style errors exist.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your comments on my paper, so that it can be greatly improved. The following is my answer to every question：
- There has yet to be an actual decision about the obtained variants. I am proposing the application of the Multicriteria methods to fulfill this request.
Answer：We went to understand this method that you proposed. In this study, although there are some differences in environmental factors such as slope direction, slope position, altitude and other environmental factors, they do not reach the level of coding. For the index of plot characteristics, it is a control variable, so the difference is controlled when the plot is selected, so this analysis is meaningless. For others, we used a multi-factor analysis of variance for forest type and soil layer. We used redundancy analysis for tree species and community characteristics. We used correlation analysis for soil physical and cementing material indicators with soil aggregate stability.
- The figures are blurry. It is tough to read the values from them.
Answer：I think you are referring to the pictures in Table 6 and Table 7. I have modified them
- Authors should enclose a map of the analyzed location.
Answer：It has been added.
Best wishes
Yafei Wang
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors respons for reviewer comment or/and improve manuscript. I recommend for publication in Forest journal.
Reviewer 3 Report
All the improvements now satisfy my requests.
