Spatial Pattern of Ecosystem Services and the Mechanism of Eco-Industry Formation in South China Karst Nature Reserves
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
The paper is interesting and has potential. This study provides a scientific point of view to manage eco-resources and the sustainable development of the eco-industry in karst nature reserve.
However it better if you check the textx in accord to Instructions for the authors https://www.mdpi.com/journal/forests/instructions#submission . In particular, please reference numbers should be placed in square brackets [ ], and placed before the punctuation; for example [1], [1–3] or [1,3].
In my opinion you can improve the draft following these reccomendations:
Please add reference to "The socioeconomic statistical data mainly consists of statistical yearbooks supplemented by bulletins on national economic and social development statistics" (lines 121-123);
"based on field questionnaire research" Please in my opinion the sentence is too evasive. Please specify the main questions of the questionnaire and whom they were addressed (line 124);
Please correct "Greate" in "Create" (line 166);
"Based on reference literature"The sentence is too evasive. Please, specify the sources used and add the reference. (Line 167)
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
With substantial interest I have read Your manuscript titled „Ecosystem Services Spatial Pattern and Eco-industry Formation Mechanism of South China Karst Nature Reserves”. In my opinion it is generally well-planed, however I have found some imperfections, which should be corrected or at least clarified before an eventual publication. Please, find them below:
1. In Abstract section the main conclusion should be added.
2. I suggest to enlarge the Introduction chapter and add information about current state of knowledge on ecosystem services of karst areas. On the basis of knowledge gap, the aims of presented studies should be listed. Moreover, You should better justify why You have chosen the South China Karst Nature Reserves.
3. Lines 102-133. The characteristics of ecosystems localised within study area should be more detailed. Please, add the characteristics of selected Guizhou Maolan National NR and Guangxi Mulun National NR (area, locality etc.)
4. Figures in present form are illegible due to too small font size. Please, improve their quality. Furthermore all used abreviations should be explained into captions.
5. The refferences to particular literature sources should be placed in brackets. In the present form the text is a bit difficult to read.
6. Please, look into following literature sources. Perhaps some of them will be useful in manuscript corrections:• Chen, W., Zhang, X. & Huang, Y. 2021. Spatial and temporal changes in ecosystem service values in karst areas in southwestern China based on land use changes. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 45724–45738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13915-5
• Wang, K., Zhang, C., Chen, H. et al. 2019. Karst landscapes of China: patterns, ecosystem processes and services. Landscape Ecol 34, 2743–2763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00912-w
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is about ecosystem services in karst areas. The topic is interesting and actual topic. Topic fit to scope of journal. Unfortunately, the paper is chaotic and impossible to evaluate at this stage.
Below mainly comments:
1. The abstract is too long and does not present the essence of the work.
2. Keywords are to be different from the words in the title.
3. Introduction needs to be structured and must be cited. There are only some numbers; I do not know exactly what they refer to. The lack of citations makes the introduction challenging to understand and evaluate. This also applies to the discussion.
4. the majority of the figures are illegible
5. the work uses several terms commonly used in society and requires explanation: eco-product and eco-industry.
6. Lack of a thesis and unclear purpose of the work. This should be emphasised.
7. From where?: Equivalent Factors of Ecosystem Service Value (Table 1).
8. The contents of the tables (1,2,3) are unreadable.
9. Extend the title of Figure 3. EPV of Karst NR.
10. Figure 7, 12, 13. - unreadable
11. Lack of citation does not allow for evaluation of this chapter (" discussion").
12. The conclusion is very long and does not present the results but only summarises the work. The conclusion, in this case, must be submitted in bullet points.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
I do not have any remarks or suggestions for further improvements.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThey answered all my comments.
Some problems are just with some figures that are not readable.
Now the Editor should decide about it.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
