INTRO: A key management prescription in intensively managed production forests is the tree species grown. This has also implications for biodiversity. In southern Sweden, there has been a rapid shift in land use, with Norway spruce replacing Scots pine. The authors evaluated these concerns by surveying the understorey vascular plants and bryophyte communities in spruce and pine forests. The results revealed significantly higher coverage of vascular plants in sites dominated by Scots pine, and a distinctive community composition in these stands; whereas the cover of bryophytes is similar in both stand types.
MERITS: The study question is relevant for practical conservation. The data and methods seem appropriate. Inferences are justified and the abstract is generally well written.
CRITIQUE: It would be good to specify "mature age categories".
DISCUSSION: I would like to see a general conclusion, i.e. conservation or management implications of this work.
- - -
INTRO: Due to a recent shift in forestry practices, Norway spruce has replaced Scots pine in many Swedish production forests. This change of dominant tree species is likely to affect forest biodiversity. Therefore, a vegetation survey was conducted to record the vascular plant and bryophyte flora in the understorey of both spruce and pine-dominated forests. Differences were observed in vascular plant cover and community composition, but not in bryophyte cover.
MERITS: As production forests form a major percentage of all boreal forests, the study has relevant conservation implications.
CRITIQUE: Based on the abstract, I was left with the impression that only the coverage of bryophytes was recorded, not community composition. Is that correct?
The community composition of vascular plants was different between the forest types, but how? The results could be stated more specifically with the same amount of words.
What about the implications for biodiversity: which forest type harbors the highest plant diversity in the understorey?
DISCUSSION: I am questioning the novelty of this research, which means that the abstract is lacking a justification (a knowledge gap to be filled). Are there no previous studies like this? I would imagine the vegetation composition in different types of boreal forests has already been extensively surveyed, but I might be wrong.
- - -
INTRO: Vascular plant and bryophyte communities in 60 Norway spruce and Scots pine dominated forest stands in Southern Sweden are studied. The objective was to evaluate the effects of site characteristics and silvicultural practices on the diversity of understorey communities.
MERITS: As stated in the title, the silvicultural species-choice-decision can have consequences for biodiversity. Thus, the idea of the study is interesting.
CRITIQUE: The introduction is too long as compared to other parts of the Abstract. The objective is not specific enough. The methods are not described at all. Only the results of a total cover of vascular plants and bryophytes are presented. Conclusions are absent.
DISCUSSION: The results presented in current form do not characterize biodiversity and thus do not have implications for nature conservation.