Estimation of Terrestrial Net Primary Productivity in the Yellow River Basin of China Using Light Use Efficiency Model
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Tittle. The title is appropriate to the subject, informative and concise.
Abstract. The abstract is concise, provides a clear overview, includes essential facts for the paper, and concludes with a final point that places the work described in a broader context.
Keywords. These are enough for the topic.
Introduction. The first and second paragraphs include background to provide an appreciation for the context of the work presented. The third paragraph provides the background to see the particular topic of the research in relation to a general area of study but it’s necessary a paragraph that links the research developed with the need for more investigation. In the last paragraph, the aim helps to understand better the study and states the specific purpose of the research.
Line 44 — It’s necessary to define CASA model, what does CASA mean?
Material and methods. I In this section, the authors describe the correct steps that followed during conducting their study.
Figures 1 and 2 ― The size letters are deficient; it’s necessary to improve the size to read the text correctly.
Line 130 ― It’s better to set figure 3 in this line (below the paragraph).
Results. This section was well written. The results say about the objective that motivates the research.
Figure 4 ― The size letters are deficient; it’s necessary to improve the size to read the text correctly.
Discussion. In this section, the authors take a broad look at their findings and examine the work in the larger context of the field, but it’s necessary to include more references to support the discussion.
Line 338 ― It’s better to set figure 10 in this line (below the paragraph).
Conclusion. This section included the major conclusions, which were briefly written.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors
You have done a good study but needs minor revisions. See the comments and suggestions in the manuscript (reviewed) attached herewith and revise your paper accordingly. It deserves a place in 'Sustainability' after revision.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
First of all, let me congratulate you the chosen subject, which is a high interest one, at the moment.
Secondly, I'll just make you some suggestions, in order to organize the paper:
1. Use the journal's template, so that the first condition to be met.
2. Pay attention to the measurements units all over your article - reading it, I am very confused about formulas, calculations and so on. Examples: km2 or km-2? gcmj-1? gcm-2.month-1? fPAR or FPAR? SR or Sr? c or C (for carbon)? AND SO ON.
3. Also, a lot of spaces in minus, especially in the measurements units and in the text citation, making difficult to understand the results.
4. Poor Conclusions - please use some concrete data in this section.
5. References - they look like being part of another paper. Different fonts, type of writing, details of cited articles etc.
Please edit your paper, in order to make it easy to read, even by a non-specialist.
In the background, check one more time the English grammar of the entire text.
Good luck,
M. Berca
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for taking my suggestions into considerations.
Please revise another time the entire paper, for the final touch.
Pay attention to the following aspects:
1) Some words, like "envi5" - is it "ENVI 5"?
2) References - some of them are in black, others in blue. 36 and 37 are missing - not mentioned in the text.
3) Check again all the measurement units - some of them need a space, a subscript or superscript (even in formulas) etc. Try to use "," for large numbers, to be more clear for readers.
4) Figures don't have the title written the same. In addition, some of them are mentioned in black, others in blue. Totally different (figure11).
Thank you for your efforts and please be ensured by my entire appreciation for your work.
Best regards,
M. Berca
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
