Simulated Validation and Prediction of Land Use under Multiple Scenarios in Daxing District, Beijing, China, Based on GeoSOS-FLUS Model
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Suggestion and comments
General comments:
This paper presents a study about multi-scenario simulation and prediction of land use in Daxing District. As a satellite city of Beijing, with the completion of Daxing Airport, Daxing District will become a hot spot for future development and construction in Beijing. This paper provides a reference for ecological protection and development in Daxing District. The structure and language of this article require major revisions to meet the requirements of publication. It is recommended that the author resubmit after revision. The major comments are as follows:
1. The introduction part of the article is too simple, it is recommended that the author add the following content: increase the significance of the research, reasons of chose Daxing District as the study area, the advantages and disadvantages of the selection method, and the objectives of this article.
2. Climate and human activities are the main factors affecting land use. It is recommended that the authors add a description of the climatic conditions and socioeconomic of the study area.
3. the Methods and Results part need to rewrite, the authors put a lot of results into the Methods part.
4. the Discussion part need to write separately, it is recommended that the author adds the impact of climate change, human activities, and policy changes on land use in the Discussion part, and discusses the shortcomings of this paper in detail.
5. The natural factors affecting the spatial distribution of desertification are unscientific. It is suggested that the author should strengthen the literature reading on desertification.
6. The full spelling is required on the first occurrence of shorthand phrases, such as “CNLUCC”.
7. There are too many charts and Tables, Some graphs and tables are duplicated, so it is recommended to simplify the graphs and tables.
Author Response
请参阅附件。
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.docx
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article is original only because of the space analyzed (Daxing District of Beijing). Otherwise, the research uses models and methods that have been verified and intensively used in recent years, especially in the Chinese scientific space. In the architecture of the text I noticed several awkwardnesses : 1. The authors talk about the use of the Markov model, but there are several Markov models... In the text, the sequence of words „Markov chain” appears only once, on page 4, in the title of table no 3: Test for land-use change for Daxing District in 2018 as predicted using the 152 Markov chain (km²). I think the authors should specify right from the Abstract that it is a Markov chain model. 2. Toponyms on the maps affect the clarity of the images and do not justify their existence, especially since they are never referred to in the text. 3. The authors keep the discourse very close to the GeoSOS-FLUS software manual but do not cite the main article presenting the model (respectively Xiaoping Liu et al. 2017. A future land use simulation model (FLUS) for simulating multiple land use scenarios by coupling human and natural effects. Landscape and Urban Planning. 168. 94:116). 4. The results obtained (4. Results) are presented analytically, without depth, the synthesis (also very succinct) appearing only in the last part (5. Discussions and Conclusions).Although the method of combining FLUS with evolutionary scenarios has been applied before (for example Zhang, C.;Wang, P.; Xiong, P.; Li, C.; Quan, B. Spatial Pattern Simulation of Land Use Based on FLUS Model under Ecological Protection: A Case Study of Hengyang City. Sustainability. 2021, 13, 10458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810458), the article is nevertheless interesting through the simultaneous use of several scenarios. These scenarios find their usefulness only in relation to the Daxing Zoning Plan / Territorial Spatial Planning, 2017-2035, as seems to have been the original intention of the authors. Therefore, I would recommend that point 4.Results be completed with the already existing elements from point 5, and point 5 should specify the usefulness of the three scenarios in perfecting the territorial policy measures provided by the Daxing Zoning Plan.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
There are some problems in the article that still need further revision:
1. Line17-18, “It used the FLUS model (Future Land Use Simulation) and Markov chain model to simulate and verify land-use changes for the Daxing District from 2008 to 2018”. The subject indication (It) is not clear, it is suggested to combine with the previous sentence.
2. Line 17 Change “FLUS model” to “GeoSOS-Flus model” to make it consistent with the context
3. Line 20-27, It is suggested to change to “The results show that: 1)，2），3)”.
4. Line27-28, Change “the results show that” to “these results indicate that”.
5. Line28-29, Change “and the research results” to” this study”, Rewrite it as an independent sentence and separate it from the previous sentence
6. Line 49-53, reference 5-9, It is suggested to quote the original source.
7. Line 57 – 58, reference 11-18 should be separately marked at appropriate positions, In the process of expression, the author's name only needs to be listed with his last name. When there are more than 3 authors, only the name of the first author is listed, and other authors are replaced by “et al.”
8. Line 71, “(Li,2011)”, Pay attention to the format of references.
9. Line 77-78, “(Future Land Use Simulation)” has appeared before.
10. Line 69-80, It is suggested to merge the two paragraphs
11. Line 84-97, Please clarify “Flus” or “GeoSOS-Flus”, “Markov chain” or “Markov”, It is suggested that the author rewrite these sentences because some of the sentences have repeated contextual meanings.
12. In section 2.2, To be precise, the author's data sources only include LUCC, NDVI, DEM, population density, and GDP, the other data such as “Slope, Distance to city center et al.,” is calculated and processed based on the above data. Therefore, the author needs to explain the calculation method (” Line229-237”) of this part of data. In addition, please explain the source of NDVI
13. In section “3.1. Markov Model-based Site Size Forecasting”, The purpose of applying the Markov chain model is to obtain the number of future changes in land use (Table 3), I think the author only needs to explain the principle of the Markov Chaim model and the process of obtaining Table 3. So section3.1.1 and 3.1.2 is not required, it is recommended that the author delete or put it in the results section. In addition, Sum of differences between the predicted value and the actual value of land use should be zero. Please explain why the sum of difference between the predicted value and the actual value is not zero.
14. Modify the contents of Table 1 and put it in section 3.2.1.
15. Table 7 and table 9 are duplicated. Can table 7 be deleted, please consider whether the content of section 3.2.3 can be integrated into section 3.2.2 (2) cost matrix.
16. It is suggested to change the contents of Fig. 5,7,9 into form.
17. The unused land does not appear in the study area, it is suggested to delete the relevant columns in Table 8.
18. The results and discussion part are still unsatisfactory, and the author is suggested to refer to similar literature for further improvement.
19. Please check the data in all tables. Such as Cultivated land in 2008(23699*23000=545.07km2) of Table 6 and its of Table 2(673.49km2).
20. In line 213, The author mentioned that the data resolution is 30m, why the area of one pixel in Table 6 is 23000m2.
21. The author is suggested to polish the language of the article.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
Well done with the changes.
Best wishes
Author Response
Thank you for approving our significantly revised manuscript, your suggestions have always guided us to do better. The following changes have been made this time.
(1) modified some semantically unclear statements to make it better expressed; (2) put some elements of the 3 method inside the 4 results; (3) changed the colour of the line graph to make it clearer; (4) improved the 5 discussion section; (4) checked the data in the table and made a little modification.
Reviewer 3 Report
OK. Something wrong withe the figures 8 and 9 (see lines 347-355) and 407-413
Author Response
Thank you for approving our significantly revised manuscript, your suggestions have always guided us to do better. The following changes have been made this time.
(1) modified some semantically unclear statements to make it better expressed; (2) put some elements of the 3 method inside the 4 results; (3) changed the colour of the line graph to make it clearer; (4) improved the 5 discussion section; (4) checked the data in the table and made a little modification.
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Line 57 – 68, reference 11-18 should be separately marked at appropriate positions. for example,"Yi et al. used CA-Markov models to forecast urban expansion and lay the foundation for urban development boundary delineation[13];"
Line57,59,64,66, the author's name only needs to be listed his last name, for example, using "Yi et al. "instead of “Dan Yi et al. ”
Line 192,205, 210, some text error，It is suggested that the author read the article again and correct some possible textual errors
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
