This study shows that successional trajectories are more predictable in areas with more than 60% forest cover. The ms is well written and I couldn’t spot any issues with analyses. The results are corroborated by theoretical predictions by some of the same authors, and based on bringing together datasets from across the Neotropics. I have actually very little to add. This is a very nice ms which I thoroughly enjoyed reading.
I have just a couple of comments and a question -
1)Introduction is a bit too long and if words need cutting that would certainly be the place for it
2) The discussion is mostly fine, though while I agree that it should be important (and wise) for restoration projects to consider the landscape scale, the results for recovery seem to disagree with this sentiment, as they show that stem density and basal area recovery don’t vary with forest cover. Could authors perhaps elaborate more on this?
The fast recovery of species richness at higher levels of forest cover could be due to habitat amount hypothesis or could be due to higher connectivity and lower fragmentation in these landscapes. Difficult to know, so I would probably suggest to avoid speculating.

I am curious as to why you didn’t analyse changes in species composition? Would that be even more variable than species richness?