The authors wrote that "fruit size appeared to show a positive relationship with spatial pattern of tree species, with large-sized fruit species showing greater aggregation" (p. 173), adding that it was also noted by Seidler and Plotkin (2006). This point is not correct, as Seidler and Plotkin wrote : "Species with fruits less than 2 cm in diameter are more aggregated than those with fruits 2-5 cm in diameter; and species with fruits greater than 5 cm in diameter show the least spatial clustering" (p. 2133, see also fig. 2). The authors Datta and Rawat probably made confusion between the cluster size and the level of aggregeted distribution: a smaller cluster size means a more aggregated spatial distribution (see Seidler and Plotkin, 2006 - p. 2133, first paragraph).