Feasibility of Tea/Tree Intercropping Plantations on Soil Ecological Service Function in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Editor
MDPI Agronomy
I am sharing my observations about the manuscript: “agronomy-2438455 Feasibility of Tea/Tree Intercropping Plantations on Soil Ecological”. The study is a review about Tea garden intercropping systems in China. The review was divided in pieces, as an original article (introduction, Material and Methods, results, Discussion and Conclusions). Scientific databases were used to select the articles (for instance, Web of Science Core Collection and Elsevier Science Direct abstracts) and available technologies were used to organize (Zotero) and explore the database (ArcGIS Map). However, comments of the results are citations and the conclusions seem results. Another point is that an important piece in the “Appendix A/ II. Criteria” is describing the methods used in study.
Best regards.
23 May 2023.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1: Line 46 Are all species of the Appendix I Table A1?
Response 1: Yes, all species mentioned in this article have been listed in Appendix I Table A1, and all species (there are also some species intercropping with tea trees but not mentioned in the article) are listed in supplemental materials Table S3.
Point 2: Line 93-98 Are these objectives from the study also? Who will do this you or the study?
Response 2: I will do these things. And all the data are from the study, I will collect them together and do the analysis. For example, every study issued the location and intercropping types in their study, I marked every intercropping location, species, and type to draw a map of their distributions.
Point 3: Line 110 Are Chinese term necessary in the table?
Response 3: To be honest, YES. That means the search terms are in Chnese. Another part is in English.
Point 4: Line 112 Pay attention punctuation and capital letter.
Response 4: Sorry, it should be "such as..."tea fruit compound type", and the search was repeated."
Point 5: Line 127 Your results have comments with citations, but in general this is common only in the discussion.
Response 5: I thought these results were analysis from these citations. If it is unnecessary, I think the citations could be deleted and I will reorganize the citations and references.
Point 6: Line 439 Is this conclusion or results?
Response 6: This is a comparison between two objectives, which aims to show the importance of intercropping tea plantations as well as table 2. But it seems like this part should move to the DISCUSSION part.
Point 7: Line 441 Why is Table in the Conclusion?
Response 7: Sorry, I will move Table 2 and this little part to DISCUSSION.
And the attachment is the PDF version in which I replied to all comments. I will also submit the manuscript after I reorganize the references and move Table 2 to the Discussion part.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
I consider the review submitted to me for evaluation to be an interesting summary of knowledge on tea and tree intercropping. It provides an interesting overview of the research carried out to date and can therefore contribute to raising awareness of the benefits of this crop.
With regard to the content of the review, I have the following comments and suggestions:
Line 51 suggests supplementing here with a description of the selection of other plants for tea. The most important aspect of the selection of intercropped plants is that they should show the lowest possible rate of competition for environmental resources such as light, water and minerals.
Line 61 - 62 What are the benefits?
Line 64 I suggest completing why
Line 64 - 65 what species? I think the authors mean legumes
Line 80 add reference to references
Line 93 complete: "intercropping tea gardens in China" and their positive aspects on soil ecological services
Line 208 - 210 the sentence is redundant, I suggest deletion
Line 292 I suggest throughout the review to opt for either full names or element symbols
Line 323 In the introduction and chapter 4.1 the authors mention the cultivation of tea trees with legumes. These plants have a very positive effect on mineral cycling. Among other things, they bind symbiotic N, dissolve unavailable P and improve soil structure. Chapter 4.2 should be completed with this aspect
Line 361 no reference to references
Line 365 no reference to references
Line 516 In my opinion this section is poorly structured. The section is much too long. Much of this section should be in the discussion and not in the conclusions. This section should contain a brief summary of the review, recommendations for cultivation and future research/development perspectives.
Additionally, in lines 270, 281, 294, 341, 381, 384, 400 and 409 the form of citation of other authors is incorrect. Throughout the manuscript, please also check the superscript next to the units, they are written incorrectly.
I recommend standardising the references section. Abbreviated as well as full names of publishers appear, in some issues the full list of authors is missing. For manuscripts in languages other than English, I suggest giving the name of the language, e.g. in China. If possible, I suggest giving the DOI in all issues. If possible, please also provide English titles in manuscripts with a title in another language.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: Line 51 suggests supplementing here with a description of the selection of other plants for tea. The most important aspect of the selection of intercropped plants is that they should show the lowest possible rate of competition for environmental resources such as light, water and minerals.
Response 1: In order to show the importance of intercropping system, I add one sentence “Conducting reasonable intercropping can regulate the light, temperature, water and atmospheric conditions of tea plantations, improve the soil environment, enhance soil fertility, increase the biodiversity in the ecosystem of tea plantations, maintain the ecological balance of tea plantations, and make all ecological factors change in the direction favorable to the growth of tea trees.” This statement shows that the selection conditions of intercrops in intercropping systems are that they will exhibit low competition and create a better-growing environment for tea trees.
Point 2: Line 61 - 62 What are the benefits?
Response 2: For example, when intercropping tea trees and cedar trees, it can be arranged into a network of protective forest belt around the tea garden to regulate the microclimate of the tea garden and enhance the ability of tea trees to resist catastrophic weather. When tea trees intercropping with Gentiana (G. rigescens), the tea tree can promote the growth condition of the root length of Gentiana, and Gentiana can increase the yield of tea. Intercropping of tea plants with other tree species may facilitate plant growth, enhance nutrient cycling, and bolster disease resistance.
Point 3: Line 64 I suggest completing why
Response 3: That’s right. So I reorganized this paragraph and add some examples to make the point more reasonable.
Point 4: Line 64 - 65 what species? I think the authors mean legumes
Response 4: Yes, legumes could help with nitrogen-fixing! But in this sentence, I use the example of Vulpia myuros, and I add the name of this species now.
Point 5: Line 80 add reference to references
Response 5: Reference has been added. “A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils” written by Estelle Dominati, Murray Patterson, and Alec Mackay developed a framework to classify and quantify soil natural capital and ecosystem services.
Point 6: Line 93 complete: "intercropping tea gardens in China" and their positive aspects on soil ecological services
Response 6: I add the sentence “I will analyze soil ecological functions in intercropping tea plantations from three aspects: supply services, support services, and regulation services.”
Point 7: Line 208 - 210 the sentence is redundant, I suggest deletion
Response 7: Sorry, I will delete .
Point 8: Line 292 I suggest throughout the review to opt for either full names or element symbols
Response 8: Sorry, I will modify them as element symbols.
Point 9: Line 323 In the introduction and chapter 4.1 the authors mention the cultivation of tea trees with legumes. These plants have a very positive effect on mineral cycling. Among other things, they bind symbiotic N, dissolve unavailable P and improve soil structure. Chapter 4.2 should be completed with this aspect
Response 9: That’s a good suggestion! I add a few sentences to illustrate the benefits of intercropping tea trees with soybean. “For the legumes mentioned above, soybean intercropping with tea is also a good choice. Experiments showed that soybean intercropping had a significant effect on soil improvement in tea plantations, with a significant increase in soil pH and a significant decrease in exchangeable Al content. Soil organic matter, alkaline N, fast-acting K and exchangeable Ca and Mg were significantly higher than those in monoculture tea plantations, while fast-acting P was not significantly lower, indicating that these soybeans could improve the fertility level of tea plantations”.
Point 10: Line 361 no reference to references
Response 10: In order to make this paragraph more comprehensive, I concentrate these sentences. And Line 361 and 365 are both from Lin et al.’s (2013) study, so they use the same citation.
Point 11: Line 365 no reference to references
Response 11: Line 361 and 365 are both from Lin et al.’s (2013) study, so they use the same citation. And I rewrite this sentence to make it easier to be understood.
Point 12: Line 516 In my opinion this section is poorly structured. The section is much too long. Much of this section should be in the discussion and not in the conclusions. This section should contain a brief summary of the review, recommendations for cultivation and future research/development perspectives.
Response 12: Thank you for this suggestion. I removed part of analysis to Discussion part and reorganized this section. Add a brief summary and some recommendations for future research.
Point 13: Additionally, in lines 270, 281, 294, 341, 381, 384, 400 and 409 the form of citation of other authors is incorrect. Throughout the manuscript, please also check the superscript next to the units, they are written incorrectly.
Response 13: Sure! I check the authors and correct them. As for the superscript next to the units, I also modified their format. For example, “per 12 m2” revised as “per 12 m2”, “kg/hm2” reviesed as “kg/hm2”.
Point 14: I recommend standardising the references section. Abbreviated as well as full names of publishers appear, in some issues the full list of authors is missing. For manuscripts in languages other than English, I suggest giving the name of the language, e.g. in China. If possible, I suggest giving the DOI in all issues. If possible, please also provide English titles in manuscripts with a title in another language.
Response 14: That’s a good suggestion! For this point:
- I check all the references and standardising them.
- I fill in all the missing names
- I unified all the journal names into full names
- I unified all the Chinese article names into English
- I add all the DOI's I can find
.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you very much for making the suggested changes. In my opinion, the overview is at this point adequately readable and written thus can be referred for further editorial work. I would suggest correcting the citations in the manuscript before submitting it for further work:
Line 286 Wu (number from section references, I have not found this manuscript in the index) also indicated that this water movement (...)
Line 297 of Dong Minghui et al. (39) in Suzhou was conducted (...)
Line 310 A study by Wang et al. (42) found that (...)
Similarly, I suggest performing for lines: 364, 404, 407, 423, 432
In the references section, not all Authors are listed next to the numbers: 1, 50, 60
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
-v2
Point 1: Line 286 Wu (number from section references, I have not found this manuscript in the index) also indicated that this water movement (...)
Response 1: In the references index, this article is No.37.
“Wu, J., Liu, W., & Chen, C. (2017). How do plants share water sources in a rubber-tea agroforestry system during the pro-nounced dry season? Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 236, pp. 69-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.11.017”
And I modified this sentence as “Wu et al. [37] also indicated that…”
Point 2: Line 297 of Dong Minghui et al. (39) in Suzhou was conducted (...)
Response 2: I modified this sentence as “For example, an experiment by Dong Minghui et al. [39] in Suzhou…”
Point 3: Line 310 A study by Wang et al. (42) found that (...)
Response 3: I modified this sentence as “A study by Wang et al. [42] found that intercropping…”
Point 4: Similarly, I suggest performing for lines: 364, 404, 407, 423, 432
Response 4: Yes, I modified these sentences as:
“In Lin et al.’s [47] experiment…”
“The fact is that Sun and Tang [52] reported that inoculation…”
“However, Orfanoudakis et al. [53] discovered that…”
“According to Sun et al. [59], an average of…”
“And it is also pointed out in the same article [62] that the soil is…”
Point 5: In the references section, not all Authors are listed next to the numbers: 1, 50, 60
Response 5: Thanks for your comments!! I have revised them all. And please look at the latest manuscript.
