Plant Diversity, Productivity, and Soil Nutrient Responses to Different Grassland Degradation Levels in Hulunbuir, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study “Plant diversity, productivity, and soil nutrient responses to different grassland degradation levels in Hulunbuir, China” is looking sound.

There are some comments and suggestions from my side:

Abstract

The starting sentences of the abstract and information inside need to be revised by adding proper background information and by relating it with the objective of the study.

Information in the L 12-13 need to revise for clarity.

Add methodology used for survey. Mention the exact figures/outcomes of the study in this section.

L 28-29 is describing about the prospects of the study but without clear meaning hence need to improve by adding proper method of future implications.

 

Introduction

This section is too rough and missing the relevant literature (L 37, 38). There is some information (L 42,43), that need to link. Overall, this section needs to improve by focusing on relevant literature and deleting the extra information.

Add clear hypothesis of the study before research question (L 94-96) and include objectives as both are missing in the section  

 

Materials and Methods

Recheck the latitude and longitude of the studied area (L 101). Data about the climate of the studied area could be helpful with proper reference (L 103-107). You may provide them in the form of table or graphs.

This statement is part of the introduction section (L 110-113).

No need to provide abbreviation and full form of these terminologies again and again. After first use, write just abbreviation of these terminologies in the whole manuscript (L 136, 137).

L 141-144 are written too rough, and the language is too poor. Use past tense for describing methodology.

Elaborate each terminology mentioned in the equation for example relative height of what? Same for others as well.

L 162: replace ‘single soil sample’ with ‘composite sample.’

L 162: what is 10-mesh, elaborate.

L 164: ‘Bulk Density’ why capital case?    

166-177: Too much complex information; difficult to follow. Revise for clarity. May split into small sentences.

 

 

Results

This section is hard to follow and there is a huge and mixed explanation about each parameter. The overall section must be clear by separating parameters and their explanation. For example L 207-209 (The proportion increases in which sites?)

3.3 Soil nutrient effects on plant biomass in grasslands with different degradation levels

Elaborate the results present in 3.3 more precisely by following Fig. 6.

 

Discussion

Too less information, need to add more supportive literature. Explain each parameter with proper reasoning from the recent available literature.

Also, Italicize the scientific names and use full name along with authority as well (L 367, 371….).

Conclusions

Start the conclusion section with your exact outcomes. Delete the information (493-495). Add prospects of the study as well.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Extensive English language editing is requires. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is interesting but some improvement and addition still needed as presented directly in comment

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The english quality still need for improving

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Keep the style and format of the legends consistent in Figures especially abbreviations

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx