Urban Avian Conservation Planning Using Species Functional Traits and Habitat Suitability Mapping

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Very interesting work, combining many different spatial and statistical approaches to provide insights into a very relevant topic. I recommend publication after some adjustments.

My main points:

The introduction could be improved by a clear research question or aim. The practical application of the work is clear, but the aim or question is not mentioned explicitly.

The aim of the paper seems to be to delineate priority areas for habitat conservation (as mentioned in the introduction and discussion). However, the paper does not provide information on priority areas for habitat conservation, it only provides associations of FTGs  and landscape characteristics, and subsequent habitat suitability. Please provide some information on priority areas for conservation, and how these differ per functional group. Or was the main aim to produce habitat suitability maps? Please clarify.

Some minor points:

Introduction

Line 63: a word seems to be missing in the sentence. Furthermore, the practical use of an indicator that serves as a proxy for large groups of species is clear, but does this make sense ecologically? Explain the benefits of focussing on functional traits, beyond just practical application.

Line 72: 'A functional trait approach can help planners and managers by providing the required context for managing and conserving many species. ' --> what kind of context? Be more specific

Methods

Line 86: Some grammar issues ('area study area', 'the Toronto')

Explain why the study region is a relevant/good case study to assess the problems discussed in the introduction

Line 89-90: I dont really understand what is meant by 'within surrounding watersheds'

Nice work on the presence/pseudo-absence work. Just for your interest, it might be nice to look into the work of Nathan Tarr on the Wildlife Wrangler method.

Line 117-119: How does the land use data align with the species data? I dont understand

Line 121-123: this data was only available for part of the study region?

Line 126-128: I feel like there is a word missing in this sentence. Also, no being very familiar with the study region (unfortunately), it is unclear to me whether the regions mention cover the whole study area or a (small) part of it.

130-136: How can you have habitat amount at a point? Is this the habitat amount of the direct surrounding of a point? I dont understand what is meant by '500-m buffer at a species point' but maybe this answers my previous question

Figure 2: This figure might be more intuitive if the input was provided on the left, the method over the arrow, and the (intermediate) output on the right. If output serves as input for a next step, that could be shown to the right of that (as is the case for connectivity, for example, this is both output and input)

Results

Line 223: mention the sample size

Figure 3: I would suggest to use green for positive associations and red for negative to make the figure more intuative to interpret

Table 1: Its not immediately clear to me how to interpret the 'relative influence' parameter - some guidance in the text would be helpful

Figure 4: A land use map would be useful here to to understand the spatial patterns better

Discussion

Line 294-295: Where are the priority areas? I think this should be discussed in the result section, now it is up to the reader to determine priority areas based on the maps in Figure 4

Conclusion

Line 399-403: This is not immediately clear to me - maybe a map of habitat suitability with a delinieation of urban area can visualize this?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Urban avian conservation planning using species functional traits and habitat suitability mapping

Dear Authors

The basic science of this paper is conducted in a good way and is of an appropriate standard.  The author and his team write this paper according to journal scope and modern trends. I am glad to review this paper because it’s very related to my research. I have seen many papers related to this topic and the study area has been published in well-reputed journals. If authors want to publish this study, they should provide some novelty or enhance the significance of the research. Moreover, the paper is well-structured. I am going to recommend some major changes in this paper. I hope the author will follow our comments and enhance their own study and resubmit again in this journal.  

Minor 

• Title is fine and according to the study

• In the abstract section, the author explains the whole study clearly.

• I found many type errors in the whole manuscript. The author should check the whole manuscript during revision.

• At the end of the introduction, the author should explain the objective of the study. 

• In the study area, the author should add the latitude and longitude of the study.

• Need more attention in the study area. The study area is not well structured.

• Figure 1 is not appropriate. Need to revise figure 1. The author removes the background from figure 1.

• Figure 1 is not appropriate according to the international journal.

• The author should provide the link to Avian species data.

• The author explained the methodology in a good way.

• Figure 4 is not appropriate. The author should remove the background from the figures.

• Scale is very small. I can’t see clearly.

• North symbols are also small.

• I can’t see the legend clearly in Figure 4a.

• Kilometers (km)

• Add a discussion section in this manuscript. The authors discussed some parts in the parts of results but it's not a good way.

• In the end, I would like to say, you conducted a very good study. It's better to remove some figures in the supplementary file. 

I hope the authors will improve this study and resubmit it again in this journal.

Best Regards 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The Authors prepared revised version as per my suggestion and comments.