Analyzing the Process of Land-Use Transfer Flow in the Suhai Lake Basin in China, 1980–2018

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study analyzes the spatial and temporal characteristics and driving factors of land use change in Suhai Lake Basin in the past 40 years, and the ecological problems in Suhai Lake Basin have been discussed from the perspective of land use change.  Generally, the academic contribution and innovation of this study are not clear to me. My comments and questions are as follows:

Abstract

There is a need to revise and summarize it.

Introduction

The authors need to give more detail about your objectives and problem statement.

Study area

Figure 1 is missing Direction and scale

Data sources

Figure 2 should be Improved with better resolution.

Result

The accuracy of your land use change map is missing as your results are mainly based on.

Figures 2,6 and 9 should be improved with the resolution by enhancing the layout. It is hard to find changes in different classes in the current form.

All the maps should be on the same scale

Conclusion

 

The authors should specify their scientific innovation and contribution to this study in this section, which is missing.

Author Response

 "Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors analyzed the spatial and temporal land use changes and driving factors in the Suhai Lake Basin from 1980-2018 based on land use data and using transfer matrix and land use transfer flows, and the study has implications for the sustainable development of regional land resources management and ecological environment. However, several issues need to be addressed before the article can be published.

1.Determine if the full-text figures have latitude and longitude.

2.Make sure the font of the full-text figure is preferably uniform.

3.English should be improved.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have attempted to present their study as nicely as possible. However, I found the MS too verbose and also difficult to follow in most of the sections. The authors must work on improving the readability of the article. 

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers' valuable comments about our manuscript. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. Moreover, we have studies comments carefully and have finished the corrections. We hope it meets with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to your comments are as follows.

(Original comments are in italic, we reply to the question highlighted with bold font, the added context and significant change in revised manuscript highlighted with red in paper.)

 

The authors have attempted to present their study as nicely as possible. However, I found the MS too verbose and also difficult to follow in most of the sections. The authors must work on improving the readability of the article. 

Response: Thanks to the reviewer's positive response. Special thanks for the careful review and the constructive suggestion. We have deleted some unimportant information in the result analysis part of the article, and added a summary of the result analysis part to improve the readability of the article.(Please see “Manuscript-revise - marks”)

"Please see the attachment."

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

I read closely the article---most interesting, well-written, thorough research.

 

I propose a revised title: Analyzing the Process of Land Use Transfer Flow in the Suhai Lake Basin China 1980-2018.

Excellent analysis:  The Suhai Lake Basin is located at the northern edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau,  with a very important ecological status and fragile ecosystem. Under the interference of  climate and human activities, the ecosystem service function has been degraded, and the  ecological and environmental problems are prominent, which directly threaten the safety  of the Suhai Lake Migratory Bird Nature Reserve and the livelihood of the Kazakh residents. This paper introduces the concept of ``land use transfer flow'' and applies the methods of interval level change and land use transfer chain to analyze the process, influencing  factors and problems of land use changes in the Suhai Lake Basin in the past 40 years.

All the figures are clear and interesting.

The conclusion makes good common sense to me:

In the upstream source area of Suhai Lake Basin, the main ecological problem is the  land exposure and ecological degradation in the glacial retreat zone formed by the glacial  retreat. And the water recharge conditions in the middle and lower reaches of the basin  largely determine the transformation between lakes, swamp, saline alkali land and grassland. Meanwhile, both overgrazing and overprotection can lead to the grassland degradation. Therefore, future research must be strengthened in the following aspects: ecological succession process and governance of glacier retreat zone, water recharge process and lake response in the middle and lower reaches of the watershed under future climate change, and how to determine the reasonable grazing and grazing ban intensity.

 

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

First of all, I searched the literature on the Suhai Lake basin proposed by the author and found no relevant research. What is the basis for the division of this basin.

 

The 24th reference cited by the author is to show the location of the Suhai Lake basin, but the actual article has nothing to do with the Suhai Lake basin. Is this a correct reference?

 

In lines 146-147, the author said that the land cover data should be fine tuned using field sampling points and remote sensing images. Where are the sampling points, why should they be adjusted, and what is the difference between the adjusted and pre adjusted data results

 

The author's analysis is lengthy, and it is difficult for readers to grasp the key points

 

5. Conclusion

It is meaningless to repeat the large paragraph in lines 469 to 477.

 

From line 478 to line 501, I don't think this is the way to write conclusions. It's just a long list. It's hard for readers to get key information, so they need to summarize the rules.

 

The picture quality is very poor, not beautiful.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I appreciate that the authors have substantially improved the manuscript. However, more improvement in writing is needed for smooth reading.        

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewers' valuable comments about our manuscript. Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. Moreover, We have tried our best to improve the writing of the article, especially the Abstract,  Introduction and Conclusion. We hope it meets with approval. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

The author has revised my question.

Author Response

Thank you again for your comments on our articles.