Coupled and Coordinated Relationship between Land-Use Cover Change and Ecosystem Services Value in Horqin Sandy Land
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1) 3: The presence of abbreviations in the title is very undesirable.
2) The meaning of the terms ESV and LUCC is not clear to the reader in the text. Detailed explanations of the meanings of these terms are required, with references to primary sources. The form "Land use/cover change" is also used in scientific literature.
3) Seven references in the Introduction section and the length of this section of about one page are clearly insufficient to disclose the scientific problem and its relevance.
4) In some cases, references to literature are provided ill-considered and even accidentally.
94: For example, it is unclear what works [8] and [9] have to do with "Yanshan Mountains". You should also check reference [9]. Correct the title and indicate https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.04.007
5) 174: The meaning of $d_i$ is unclear and requires a detailed explanation.
6) Formula (8): Is the parameter $C$ introduced by the authors or is it a known quantity? A detailed justification of formula (8) is required.
7) 224: Where does the condition [0,1] come from?
8) 231-234: What caused the choice of these particular parameters?
Why, for example, is the convective state of the atmosphere, the chemical composition of the atmosphere, insolation, pressure (etc., etc.) not taken into account? It is necessary to substantiate the physical connections when considering correlations.
9) 231-233: There is no justification for the choice of the 9 specified parameters. There is no justification that these parameters affect the processes under consideration. There is no analysis of the completeness of the set of parameters.
10) How are $X_i$ calculated? What are the limits of change? What exactly do the quantities $Y_1$, $Y_2$, $Y_3$ measure?
11) Some parameters in (9)-(10) are dependent. For example, the production of grain and livestock is somehow dependent on meteorological parameters.
12) How can we explain the opposite dependences on wind speed in (9)-(11)?
13) Figure 2: How can we explain that all seven types of land in Figure 2 monotonically increase their area over 40 years? As a result, the total area of the study territory increased approximately fivefold!
14) 25; 27; 40; 83, etc. : A space before a reference is required.
15) Paragraphs containing formulas (1), (2), (7), etc. must be re-registered in accordance with the following rules:
The formula is part of the sentence. A sentence cannot begin with a formula. A formula is an element of a sentence that is subject to standard syntactic rules.
16) All quantities in the formula must be defined immediately after the formula, if they do not appear higher in the text.
17) 165-172: The symbols ${\it M}$ and ${\rm M}$ are different, see also all other similar cases in the manuscript.
18) 172: There should be spaces around $D_i$.
19) Referring to formulas below in the text is very poor style. You need to refer after writing the formula.
20) 180-181: Fragment "The formula is presented as follows: "
rewrite as
"ESV coefficients are determined by the following expressions:".
See also other similar cases.
21) 182: It is necessary to correctly describe $j$, which is the index.
22) 202-204: Statement “If the value is greater than 0, it means that the indicator is higher than the overall average level; conversely, if it is less than 0, it indicates that the indicator is below the average level.” is trivial and does not conform to the style of the English language.
23) 217: It is possible to assert that “G is large,” only after defining $X_i$ and $Y_i$.
24) 224: The sentence needs to be rewritten.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
See file.
Author Response
|
Comments 1: [3: The presence of abbreviations in the title is very undesirable.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 1: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. I change the title to Coupled and Coordinated Relationship between Land Use Cover Change and Ecosystem Services Value in Horqin Sandy, Line2-3.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 2: [The meaning of the terms ESV and LUCC is not clear to the reader in the text. Detailed explanations of the meanings of these terms are required, with references to primary sources. The form "Land use/cover change" is also used in scientific literature.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 2: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. ESV is Ecosystem Services Value, LUCC is Land Use Cover Change, Land use cover change (LUCC) refers to the conversion of natural vegetated landscapes into urban, agricultural, or other anthropogenic-dominated land uses, primarily driven by natural dynamics or human-induced pressures.The ecosystem services value (ESV) represents an economic evaluation of the services and natural capital provided by an ecosystem, reflecting the ecological benefits resulting from LUCC. Line 22-35. The references have been cited in the paper.Line 22-35. ] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 3: [Seven references in the Introduction section and the length of this section of about one page are clearly insufficient to disclose the scientific problem and its relevance.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 3:[Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. I have added a detailed introduction to ESV and LUCC in the introduction, fully demonstrating researchers' comprehensive understanding of the research field and identification of research gaps. And the corresponding references have been cited. The specific modifications are as follows: In recent years, a plethora of scholars have conducted analyses on LUCC (Land Use and Land Cover Change) and ESV (Ecosystem Services Valuation). For instance, Adjei's investigation into the drivers of land cover change in Alabama provides foundational insights for projecting future scenarios across diverse economic and policy landscapes [21]. Utilizing a high-resolution land change model, Calderón-Loor forecasts forthcoming land use transitions in Australia over the coming decade [22]. Studies highlight the synergistic impacts of human activities and climate change on land use dynamics, influencing groundwater resources to varying degrees [23]. Furthermore, machine learning models offer predictive capabilities for tracking trends in land use change [24,25], thereby facilitating their integration into holistic frameworks for land use planning initiatives[26,27]. Shiferaw's analysis of forest cover's influence on ESV underscores the efficacy of robust forest conservation strategies in mitigating pressures on ecosystem services [28] Therefore, this study investigates the Horqin Sandy Land, exploring the interconnected dynamics between land use change and shifts in ecosystem service values. Utilizing "3S" technologies and field surveys, the analysis involves interpreting and analyzing remote sensing data spanning various temporal intervals to delineate the spatiotemporal evolution of land use. The equivalent factor method is applied, adjusting factors and value coefficients based on grain prices and biomass, to evaluate ecosystem service values and their fluctuations within the study area. Principal component analysis and multiple linear regression are employed for quantitative assessment of influencing factors, elucidating the primary drivers behind changes in ecosystem service values. Drawing on land and ecological analyses, a coupling coordination model is developed to examine the integrated relationship between land use change and alterations in ecosystem service values.This research provides valuable data for formulating ecological compensation and restoration plans in line with the principles of ecological civilization construction and development in Horqin Sandy Land. Moreover, it significantly contributes to promoting the coordinated development of ecology and economy in this region while enhancing its overall competitiveness. Line 62-74 and Line 100-110.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 4: [In some cases, references to literature are provided ill-considered and even accidentally. 94: For example, it is unclear what works [8] and [9] have to do with "Yanshan Mountains". You should also check reference [9]. Correct the title and indicate https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.04.007] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 4:[Thank you for pointing this out. I'm sorry, but the references and citations have been corrected. See the attachment for details.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 5: [174: The meaning of $d_i$ is unclear and requires a detailed explanation.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 5:[Thank you for pointing this out. The $d_i$ is 11 ecosystem service functions, namely food production, raw material production, water supply, gas regulation, climate regulation, environmental purification, horological regulation, soil conservation, nutrient cycling maintenance, biodiversity, and aesthetic landscape. Line197-200.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 6: [Formula (8): Is the parameter $C$ introduced by the authors or is it a known quantity? A detailed justification of formula (8) is required.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 6:[Thank you for pointing this out. $C$ is a coupling degree, the references are as follows: Wei, H.; Zheng, J.; Xue, D.; Dong, X.; Liu, M.; Zhang, Y. Identifying the Relationship between Livelihoods and Land Ecosystem Services Using a Coupled Model: A Case Study in the "One River and Two Tributaries" Region of Tibet. Land 2022, 11, doi:10.3390/land11091377. Formula (8): G is the comprehensive index function of ESVs, reflecting the quality of the ecological environment in the study area (large values indicate that the ecological environment of the study area is in good condition, E is the comprehensive index function of LUCC, reflecting the overall level of land use in the study area (the higher the value, the higher the level of land use and vice versa).Line241-255.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 7: [224: Where does the condition [0,1] come from?] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 7:[Thank you for pointing this out. [0,1] is $C$ value range, specific reference, and has been quoted in the paper.Line250-255] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 8: [231-234: What caused the choice of these particular parameters? Why, for example, is the convective state of the atmosphere, the chemical composition of the atmosphere, insolation, ressure (etc., etc.) not taken into account? It is necessary to substantiate the physical connections when considering correlations.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 8:[Thank you for pointing this out. The Horqin Sandy Land represents a transitional agro-pastoral zone characterized by fluctuating yet generally increasing average wind speeds. Specifically, from 1980 to 1990, the average wind speed was recorded at 3.07 m/s, followed by an increase to 3.88 m/s during 1990-2000, a decline to 3.50 m/s from 2000 to 2010, and a subsequent rebound to 3.33 m/s from 2010 to 2020. Notably, these values consistently remain below the long-term average wind speed of 3.43 m/s. Average annual temperatures in the region show a fluctuating upward trajectory. During 1980-1990, temperatures averaged 6.45°C, rising to 7.08°C from 1990 to 2000, followed by a slight decrease to 7.20°C from 2000 to 2010 and a further decline to 6.78°C from 2010 to 2020. These fluctuations center around the long-term average temperature of 6.89°C. Precipitation trends in the Horqin Sandy Land exhibit a "rise-drop-rise" pattern. Annual precipitation averaged 345.45 mm from 1980 to 1990, increased to 382.14 mm during 1990-2000, decreased to 290.18 mm from 2000 to 2010, and subsequently rose to 376.88 mm from 2010 to 2020. Notably, the precipitation during 2000-2010 was lower than the long-term average of 349.65 mm. Annual evaporation in the Horqin Sandy Land region demonstrates a predominantly upward trajectory, albeit with a slight dip in mean values following an initial increase. Evaporation measured 55.41 mm from 1980 to 1990 and 67.84 mm from 1990 to 2000, both figures below the long-term average of 71.66 mm for this period. Subsequently, evaporation increased to 81.39 mm from 2000 to 2010 and 79.18 mm from 2010 to 2020, surpassing the long-term average. Socioeconomic factors, notably population dynamics, have markedly influenced changes in ecosystem service values within the Horqin Sandy Land. The population grew from 5.957 million in 1980 to 7.432 million in 2020, peaking at 7.729 million in 2009. Over this 40-year span, the population increased by 1.7721 million, indicating a growth rate of 29.74%. This demographic expansion has significantly heightened demands on land, water, and other natural resources. During the same period, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the Horqin Sandy Land rose steadily from 1.7051 billion yuan in 1980 to 304.0244 billion yuan in 2020, marking an increase of approximately 178-fold, totaling 3023.193 billion yuan. This economic growth has coincided with intensified pressures on land resources, escalated land development activities, and potential shifts in land use patterns, thereby directly impacting ecosystem service values. These factors exert varying impacts on the ecosystem service values of the Horqin Sandy Land, motivating their selection as focal parameters for this study. Line 507-615.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 9: [231-233: There is no justification for the choice of the 9 specified parameters. There is no justification that these parameters affect the processes under consideration. There is no analysis of the completeness of the set of parameters] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 9: [Thank you for pointing this out. Based on equations 13-16, the resulting table presents principal component scores and composite scores representing various factors influencing the variability in ecosystem service values in Horqin Sandy Land. Scores of each main component and overall score
The comprehensive score reflecting ecosystem service value in the Horqin Sandy Land has demonstrated a notable upward trajectory over time. Prior to 2002, this score predominantly languished in negative terrain, punctuated briefly by positive spikes in 1997 and 1998, before reverting to negative territory. Post-2002, however, there was a marked shift towards positivity, characterized by a fluctuating pattern of growth, which moderated after 2009. Socioeconomic dynamics, notably economic and technological advancements, have played a pivotal role in steering these changes in ecosystem service values. Concurrently, natural influences such as temperature and wind speed also exert significant driving forces in this context. To elucidate the nexus between changes in ecosystem service values within the Horqin Sandy Land and their underlying drivers, a regression analysis was performed employing SPSS. Independent variables comprised factor scores extracted from principal component analyses of driving factors spanning 1980 to 2020 within the Horqin Sandy Land. Standardized ecosystem service value data served as the dependent variable. The resulting multiple regression equation for ecosystem service value (F) in the Horqin Sandy Land, relative to each driving factor (Y1, Y2, Y3), is presented below: F = -0.122 - 0.392Y1 - 0.266Y2 + 0.414Y3 R2 = 0.718 The analysis reveals that 71.8% of the variability in ESVs within the Horqin Sandy Land can be accounted for by the respective indicators. Furthermore, all regression coefficients were found to be statistically significant at levels below 0.05, thereby validating the robustness of the regression model. Examination of the regression equation reveals a negative coefficient for the independent variable (socio-economic factors), suggesting an inverse relationship between socio-economic development and ESVs in the Horqin Sandy Land. This observation implies that societal progress may inadvertently exert adverse effects on the local ecological environment. Additionally, coefficients for natural factors exhibit both positive and negative variations, indicating that changes in climate affect ESVs in the Horqin Sandy Land in diverse ways, underscoring the unpredictable nature of climate impacts. Line508-688] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 10: [How are $X_i$ calculated? What are the limits of change? What exactly do the quantities $Y_1$, $Y_2$, $Y_3$ measure?] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 10: [Thank you for pointing this out.This study conducted KMO and Bartlett tests on 9 indicators to assess their suitability for factor analysis. The results indicated a significance level of 0, which is less than the threshold of 0.05. The KMO measure was 0.717, and the approximate chi-square was 580.557 with 36 degrees of freedom. These values collectively suggest strong inter-correlations among the selected factors, rejecting the null hypothesis of the Bartlett's test, thereby supporting the suitability for principal component analysis. Characteristic value and principal component contribution rate
Principal component analysis (PCA) was employed to derive factor variables, yielding eigenvalues and contribution rates for the principal components, detailed in the accompanying table. Analysis revealed the extraction of three principal components, which collectively account for 83.706% of the variance in ecosystem service value changes within the Horqin Sandy Land. This underscores the substantial explanatory power of these components regarding the underlying dynamics of ecosystem services in the region. Composition factor and rotational component factor load matrix
The analysis from the table reveals that Principal Component 1 exhibits a negative association with average annual wind speed and substantial positive correlations with GDP, per capita disposable income, grain production, and livestock quantity, each showing loadings exceeding 0.8. Principal Component 2 demonstrates notable positive associations with factors such as average annual wind speed (loading = 0.864), average annual temperature (loading = 0.790), and annual evaporation (loading = 0.450), while displaying a marginal negative correlation primarily with Gross National Product (GNP). Principal Component 3 displays a significant positive correlation with annual precipitation (loading = 0.962) and negative correlations with average annual temperature, population size, and livestock quantity. $Y_1$, $Y_2$, $Y_3$ are the score of the three principal components selected above. Line617-644.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 11: [Some parameters in (9)-(10) are dependent. For example, the production of grain and livestock is somehow dependent on meteorological parameters.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 11:[Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Numerous factors exert influence on the dynamics of ecosystem service values, interconnected in nature. Therefore, through increased data collection, a more rigorous quantitative analysis can expound upon their specific impacts on ecosystem services within the Horqin Sandy Land. Considering data accessibility within the study area, and building upon a comprehensive review of prior literature, this investigation has chosen nine key indicators spanning the years 1980 to 2020—annual precipitation, average annual temperature, average annual wind speed, annual evaporation, total population, gross national product (GNP), per capita disposable income, grain production, and livestock quantity-to delineate the factors driving changes in ecosystem service values across the Horqin Sandy Land.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 12: [How can we explain the opposite dependences on wind speed in (9)-(11)?] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 12:[Thank you for pointing this out. The average wind speed in the Horqin Sandy Land exhibits a discernible fluctuating upward trajectory over recent decades. Specifically, from 1980 to 1990, the average wind speed measured 3.07 m/s, which escalated to 3.88 m/s during 1990-2000, before moderating to 3.50 m/s from 2000 to 2010. Subsequently, during the period spanning 2010 to 2020, the average wind speed rebounded to 3.33 m/s. These figures oscillate around the long-term mean of 3.43 m/s. The intensified wind dynamics manifest both beneficial and detrimental impacts on ecosystem services within the Horqin Sandy Land. Elevated wind speeds expedite the dispersal of airborne pollutants, thereby facilitating air purification and atmospheric gas regulation. Conversely, these conditions exacerbate challenges inherent to the transitional ecology of the Horqin Sandy Land, which straddles semi-humid and semi-arid biomes. Increased wind velocities enhance surface evaporation rates, leading to decreased soil moisture and expansion of sandy terrain, consequently compromising the overall ecological resilience of the region.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 13: [Figure 2: How can we explain that all seven types of land in Figure 2 monotonically increase their area over 40 years? As a result, the total area of the study territory increased approximately fivefold!] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 13:[Thank you for pointing this out. Figure 2 illustrates that all land use types within the study area exhibited a discernible upward trend. Consequently, the total land area utilized in the study area experienced a notable increase.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 14: [25; 27; 40; 83, etc. : A space before a reference is required.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 14:Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. This section has been changed in the article. Line812-916] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 15: [Paragraphs containing formulas (1), (2), (7), etc. must be re-registered in accordance with the following rules: The formula is part of the sentence. A sentence cannot begin with a formula. A formula is an element of a sentence that is subject to standard syntactic rules.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 15: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. This section has been changed in the article.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 16: [All quantities in the formula must be defined immediately after the formula, if they do not appear higher in the text.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 16: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. All formulas have been explained in the paper.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 17: [165-172: The symbols ${\it M}$ and ${\rm M}$ are different, see also all other similar cases in the manuscript.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 17: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. For Line 165-172, changes have been made. Line190-192.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 18: [172: There should be spaces around $D_i$.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 18: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Specific modifications are as follows: is the ESV coefficient. Line196.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 19: [Referring to formulas below in the text is very poor style. You need to refer after writing the formula.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 19:[Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. The style of all formulas has been changed: = ( m × n ) Di = M × di ESVj =∑kj=1 Aj× VCj j =∑kj=1 ESVj = x - u /σ =∑ni=1 Ui × Wi =∑ni=1 Xi × Yi =｛G × E × [ (G + E) / 2 ] -2｝2 1 = 0.079X1 + 0.061X2 + 0.135X3 + 0.029X4 + 0.435X5 + 0.3.78X6 + 0.436X7 + 0.453X8 + 0.438X9 Y2 = 0.585X1 - 0.188X2 + 0.604X3 + 0.213X4 - 0.224X5 + 0.308X6 - 0.214X7 - 0.078X8 - 0.126X9 Y3 = 0.389X1 + 0.875X2 - 0.181X3 + 0.173X4 - 0.048X5 - 0.072X6 - 0.046X7 + 0.026X8 - 0.099X9 Y = (51.699Y1 +19.614Y2 +12.393Y3 ) / 82.706] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 20: [180-181: Fragment "The formula is presented as follows: " rewrite as "ESV coefficients are determined by the following expressions:". See also other similar cases.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 20: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Line180-181 have changed to Line214.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 21: [182: It is necessary to correctly describe $j$, which is the index.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 21:[Thank you for pointing this out. Line205.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 22: [202-204: Statement “If the value is greater than 0, it means that the indicator is higher than the overall average level; conversely, if it is less than 0, it indicates that the indicator is below the average level.” is trivial and does not conform to the style of the English language.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 22:[Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Specific modifications are as follows: In this equation, Z is the indicator value after standardization; x is a value in the original data; u is the mean of the original data; σ is the standard deviation of the original data. The standardized values fluctuate around 0. Values greater than 0 mean that the indicator is higher than the overall average level; conversely, values below 0 indicate that the indicator is below the average level. Line224-228.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 23: [217: It is possible to assert that “G is large,” only after defining $X_i$ and $Y_i$.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 23:[Thank you for pointing this out. is the comprehensive index function of ESVs, reflecting the quality of the ecological environment in the study area (large values indicate that; i is the weight of the i-th ESV indicator in the study area, reflecting its importance in the overall evaluation; Yi is the standardized value of the i-th ESV indicator in the study area; n is the number of ESVs corresponding to changes in different land use types in the study area. Line241-255.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 24: [224: The sentence needs to be rewritten.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 24: [Thank you for pointing this out. I am very sorry for the grammatical error. The sentence has been rewritten.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Point 1: Extensive editing of English language required |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 1: Thank you very much for your advice! I am very sorry for the language errors in the article, and the article has been re-polished by a professional polishing company. And through your suggestions to make a comprehensive revision of the article, the specific revision has been submitted to the system. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsBased on the interpretation data of remote sensing images in the study area, the coupled coordination degree model was established by using the ecosystem service value evaluation method to quantify the coupling coordination relationship between land use and cover change and the change of 12 ecosystem service values in the study area, and the impact of different driving factors on the change of ecosystem service value was investigated. The research has certain significance, but there are also some problems, as follows:
1. The introduction needs further improvement. The introduction lacks specificity and references. It fails to adequately demonstrate the researcher's comprehensive understanding of the field and the identification of Research Gaps. Consider providing a more detailed overview of existing literature and highlighting the identified research gap.
2. In the data source, you are advised to add the data acquisition date.
3. In "3.2. Analysis of Land Use Change", which involves a large amount of data, it is suggested to add tables to show land use change more clearly.
4. Lack of discussion. This study did not make further comparative analysis of the methods, data and results of related research with this study, which makes it difficult to highlight the innovation points and research contributions of this study.
5. What do a,b,c,d,e and f in Figure 3 stand for respectively?
6. Only 4 land types appear in Figure 4. Why?
Author Response
|
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1. Summary |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below. All of your suggestions have been changed in the revised mode of the article. The revised manuscript has been submitted to you in the system. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
2. Questions for General Evaluation |
Reviewer’s Evaluation |
Response and Revisions |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? |
Must be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? |
Can be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling? |
Can be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? |
Can be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is the article adequately referenced? |
Must be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature? |
Can be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 1: [1. The introduction needs further improvement. The introduction lacks specificity and references. It fails to adequately demonstrate the researcher's comprehensive understanding of the field and the identification of Research Gaps. Consider providing a more detailed overview of existing literature and highlighting the identified research gap.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 1: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. In the introduction part, I further introduced the detailed introduction of ecosystem service value and land use and cover change, and further explained the comprehensive understanding of other researchers in this study and the identification of research gaps. Line22-114.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 2: [2. In the data source, you are advised to add the data acquisition date.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 2: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. The data in this study came from:Resource and Environment Data Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (http://www.resdc.cn/data) , date are 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, 2020 and 2023 year.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 3: [3. In "3.2. Analysis of Land Use Change", which involves a large amount of data, it is suggested to add tables to show land use change more clearly.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 3: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Add the table below. Line357.] Dynamic attitude of land use in Horqin sandy land
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 4: [4. Lack of discussion. This study did not make further comparative analysis of the methods, data and results of related research with this study, which makes it difficult to highlight the innovation points and research contributions of this study.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 4:[Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. The comparison between the methods and results of this paper and those of other studies has been added to the discussion section of this paper, and the shortcomings and future prospects of this paper have been further elaborated. The specific modifications are as follows: Numerous studies and applications have been conducted on the value of ecosystem services[41]. Most ecosystem service assessments focus on the ecological level, whereas the social or economic aspects are still largely ignored. The accurate and effective evaluation of the value of ecosystem services is currently a research hotspot[42]. With the increase in human activities such as agricultural production and urban construction, land use types have undergone rapid changes[43]. Unreasonable land use directly affects the flow of energy and material cycling in the ecosystem[44], leading to the loss of production and ecological functions and ultimately destroying the ecosystem services[45]. Against the background of human activities, the global ecosystem is subjected to continuous degradation. The transformation of land use types is not only related to changes in ground cover but also has an impact on the function and structure of the ecosystem, which in turn determines the value of ecosystem services. In this study, by investigating the coupling relationship between LUCC and ESVs, the level of rational use and protection of land resources is improved, the effective governance approaches for land desertification in the study areaare expanded, and our understanding of the complexity and vulnerability of the sandy ecosystem is improved. Overall, the improvement and sustainable development of the local ecological environment are promoted. At the beginning of the 1980s, with the promotion of the household contract responsibility system throughout the country, the "Grazing land Law" was officially established in 1985 to determine the pasture contract system. The study area actively responded to national policies and implemented production responsibility systems including "livestock ownership", "contract production", and "contracting of farmland and pasture". The implementation of these policies greatly stimulated the production enthusiasm of local farmers and herdsmen and promoted the development of agriculture and animal husbandry. However, at the same time, a large amount of land was reclaimed as farmland, resulting in a significant increase in the area of farmland. In addition, numerous herdsmen shifted from grazing to farming, further intensifying the intensity of land reclamation. These reclamation activities occupied large amounts of grazing land, woodland, and wetland, leading to significant area reductions. The reduction of grazing land, woodland, and wetland not only affects the local ecological balance but also has a negative impact on the value of ecosystem services. These ecosystems play an important role in maintaining soil and water, regulating climate, and maintaining biodiversity. Their reduction may lead to soil erosion, water resource reduction, climate change intensification, and other issues, which in turn affect the sustainable development of the entire region. Since the 21st century, the country has been placing great importance on the ecological restoration and protection of the study area, with the implementation of a series of ecological restoration projects in this region, mainly including the third and fourth phase of the Three North Shelterbelt Project, the Beijing-Tianjin Sandstorm Source Control Project, the Grain for Green Project, and the grazing land Ecological Protection Subsidy and Reward Mechanism. These projects provide economic compensation and technical support to encourage herdsmen to participate more actively in grazing land protection, with the plan to restore some farmland to woodland and grazing land. This not only strengthens the protection of the existing woodland but also effectively increases vegetation coverage by creating large forest land, reduces the grazing land destruction caused by overgrazing, improves the local ecological environment, and enhances the value of ecosystem services in the entire region. In the desert area, work such as wind prevention and sand fixation, natural grazing land conservation, and vegetation restoration has been carried out. In the loess hilly area, the Grain for Green Project has been implemented to create a large forest land area. Consequently, the forest land area increased rapidly between 2000 and 2010, but inadequate follow-up management led to a decrease in the area of woodland between 2010 and 2020. The wetland continued to increase after 2000, while the desert area continued to decrease after 2000. To some extent, this reflects the implementation of these ecological restoration projects and policies, which has significantly improved the ecological environment of the study area. The manuscript under review exhibits several notable limitations:The remote sensing data utilized within the study area exhibit constrained accuracy, lacking high-resolution imagery. Consequently, this has impacted the precision of land use type extraction, resulting in classified outputs displaying a margin of error.The study area's natural setting precludes perfect alignment with administrative boundaries, introducing inherent inaccuracies in the selection of statistical data. To enhance research precision, future investigations should seek more comprehensive data support to mitigate these discrepancies. The analysis of ESV change has been hindered by a limited selection of indicators. Enhancing the robustness of findings necessitates broadening the scope of driving factors employed in subsequent analyses. Line 690-755.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 5: [5. What do a,b,c,d,e and f in Figure 3 stand for respectively?] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 5:Thank you for pointing this out. a.b.c.d.e.f representing 1980,1990,2000,2010,2020,2023 years in the study area land use spatial distribution. This is further explained below Figure 3. Line 321-322. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 6: [6. Only 4 land types appear in Figure 4. Why?] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 6:[Thank you for pointing this out. I am so sorry. Figure 4 has been changed, as shown below:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn recent years, the global environmental crisis has not only jeopardized the normal functioning of ecosystems, but also posed a major threat to human health. Influenced by climatic attributes and intensified human activities, the desertification process in the Horqin Sandy Land has significantly intensified, making it one of the most seriously affected areas by desertification in China. I believe that this study provides valuable data for the development of ecological compensation and restoration planning in the Horqin Sandlands in accordance with the principles of ecological civilization construction and development. In addition, it may make an important contribution to the promotion of the coordinated development of ecology and economy in the region as well as to the improvement of its comprehensive competitiveness. I think the paper is of good quality and can be accepted after a minor revision. The suggestions are listed as follows:
1.L23-27: The connection between these two jargon-laden sentences is rather rigid, and the writer is advised to rethink how to express them naturally.
2.L109: The figures in your paper are a bit blurry. Please consider replacing them with clearer ones.
3.L260: The first line of this paragraph is indented differently than the rest of the paragraph.
4.L256: Add separators for numbers over 1,000. Check all numbers, including those in tables/figures, e.g., line 348, etc.
5.L262-264: Returning farmland to forest and grassland is an effective measure to increase the area of grassland, and it is recommended to check whether there is any problem with the expression here.
6.L312: There seems to be an inconsistency in the font size in the legend, with grazing land being significantly smaller than the rest of the type.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
|
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
|
||
|
1. Summary |
|
|
|
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below. All of your suggestions have been changed in the revised mode of the article. The revised manuscript has been submitted to you in the system. |
||
|
2. Questions for General Evaluation |
Reviewer’s Evaluation |
Response and Revisions |
|
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? |
Can be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
|
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? |
Yes |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
|
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling? |
Can be improved |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
|
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? |
Yes |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
|
Is the article adequately referenced? |
Yes |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
|
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature? |
Yes |
Please see response letter below(Part Three)
|
|
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors |
||
|
Comments 1: [1.L23-27: The connection between these two jargon-laden sentences is rather rigid, and the writer is advised to rethink how to express them naturally.] |
||
|
Response 1: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. This article has been refined, L23-27 have been modified.] |
||
|
Comments 2: [2.L109: The figures in your paper are a bit blurry. Please consider replacing them with clearer ones.] |
||
|
Response 2: [Thank you for pointing this out. All the graphs in the article have been changed.] |
||
|
Comments 3: [3.L260: The first line of this paragraph is indented differently than the rest of the paragraph.] |
||
|
Response 3: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. L260 has been changed.] |
||
|
Comments 4: [4.L256: Add separators for numbers over 1,000. Check all numbers, including those in tables/figures, e.g., line 348, etc] |
||
|
Response 4: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. For numbers over 1,000 in the text haved add separators.] |
||
|
Comments 5: [5. L262-264: Returning farmland to forest and grassland is an effective measure to increase the area of grassland, and it is recommended to check whether there is any problem with the expression here.] |
||
|
Response 5: [Thank you for pointing this out.I agree with this comment. L262-264 has been modified. Specific modifications are as follows: Between 1980 and 2020, the farmland area in the study region exhibited a continuous expansion, with a total growth of 733.58 km2. The most substantial increase was observed between 1990 and 2000, resulting in an additional area of 367.06 km2. This trend reflects the escalating demand for arable land driven by population growth and advancements in agricultural technology. Concurrently, the construction land area expanded from 945.97 km2 in 1980 to 1565.79 km2 by 2020. Notably, the largest surge occurred between 2000 and 2010, witnessing an expansion of infrastructure-related areas by approximately 329.82 km2, thereby highlighting the accelerated urbanization along with increasing demands for housing and transportation. ] |
||
|
Comments 6: [6.L312: There seems to be an inconsistency in the font size in the legend, with grazing land being significantly smaller than the rest of the type.] |
||
|
Response 6:[Thank you for pointing this out.I agree with this comment. The legend has been changed. Specific changes are as follows:
|
||
|
4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language |
||
|
Point 1: Minor editing of English language required |
||
|
Response 1: Thank you very much for your advice! I am very sorry for the language errors in the article, and the article has been re-polished by a professional polishing company. And through your suggestions to make a comprehensive revision of the article, the specific revision has been submitted to the system. |
||
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1) Lines 24, 26, 29, 30, etc. in all similar places: a space is required before the reference to the literature. The situation is similar in line 198 (and other places) before the formula reference.
2) I keep insisting that:
Paragraphs containing formulas, etc. must be redone in accordance with the following rules:
The formula is part of the sentence. A sentence cannot begin with a formula. A formula is an element of a sentence that is subject to standard syntactic rules involving periods and commas.
These requirements are part of the English language (as well as others), despite the established practice of text formatting in journal Sustainability. As a result, your article will have the correct classic look. This is a wish that will make your text more aesthetically beautiful ))
3) The right side of formulas (3) and (4) are the same. Obviously, formula (4) needs to be corrected. Apparently the index "j" is redundant.
4) What are the dimensions of the quantities in formula (5)?
If we take into account the description under the formula, then x, u and sigma have the same dimension. But the formula contradicts this.
5) Line 219: We see two commas in a row.
6) All brackets in (8) should be straight, not slanted.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required.
Author Response
|
Response to Reviewer X Comments
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1. Summary |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
2. Questions for General Evaluation |
Reviewer’s Evaluation |
Response and Revisions |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic? |
Yes |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated? |
Can be improved |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?
|
Can be improved |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented? |
Can be improved |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is the article adequately referenced? |
Yes |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?
|
Can be improved |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 1: [Lines 24, 26, 29, 30, etc. in all similar places: a space is required before the reference to the literature. The situation is similar in line 198 (and other places) before the formula reference.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 1: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. All citations and formulae in the text are preceded by Spaces. And has been corrected in the article.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 2: [I keep insisting that: Paragraphs containing formulas, etc. must be redone in accordance with the following rules: The formula is part of the sentence. A sentence cannot begin with a formula. A formula is an element of a sentence that is subject to standard syntactic rules involving periods and commas. These requirements are part of the English language (as well as others), despite the established practice of text formatting in journal Sustainability. As a result, your article will have the correct classic look. This is a wish that will make your text more aesthetically beautiful )).] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 2: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. The style of all formulas in the paper has been modified. For details, see the attachment.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 3: [The right side of formulas (3) and (4) are the same. Obviously, formula (4) needs to be corrected. Apparently the index "j" is redundant.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 3: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Formula (4) has been modified, Line 205. Index "j" has been deleted, Line 206.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 4: [What are the dimensions of the quantities in formula (5)?.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 3: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Due to the inherent variability in units and characteristics within the index framework for land use change and ecological service valuation in the Horqin Sandy Land, pronounced disparities in magnitude and scale impede direct inter-indicator analysis. Ensuring the precision and scientific integrity of the investigation necessitates the standardization of datasets pertaining to land use dynamics and ecological service values in this region. This process of normalization serves to mitigate dimensional incongruities across diverse indicators, thereby homogenizing the dataset and enabling rigorous statistical analysis and comparative assessments. The methodology adopted in this study involves the application of the "Z-score standardization" technique, formulated mathematically as follows: = x - u /σ Where, Z is the indicator value after standardization; x is a value in the original data; u is the mean of the original data; σ is the standard deviation of the original data. The standardized values fluctuate around 0. Values greater than 0 mean that the indicator is higher than the overall average level; conversely, values below 0 indicate that the indicator is below the average level. Through "Z-score standardization" processing, the standardized values of land use change in Horqin Sandy land and the standardized values of ecological service values in different regions were obtained, as shown in Table 1 and Table 2. Table 1 Standardized land use data of Horqin Sandy land
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Table 2 Total value of ecological services in Horqin Sandy Land after standardization
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 5: [Line 219: We see two commas in a row. ] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 5: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Line 219 has been modified.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments 6: [All brackets in (8) should be straight, not slanted.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Response 6: [Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. Formula (8) has been modified, Line 250-251. I have checked all the formulas in the text and have set them be straight.] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
4. 对英语语言质量意见的回应 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
第 1 点：需要对英语进行少量编辑 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
响应 1： 非常感谢您的建议！ 文本中的语言已经过重新校对。并通过您的建议对文章进行全面修改，具体修改已提交系统。 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe quality of the revised manuscript has been greatly improved, and I think it meets the publication requirements of the journal.
Author Response
Thank you very much! Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
