Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Landscape Pattern Gradient Transformation of Small-Scale Agroforestry Patches in Mountain Cities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript addresses the relationship among landscape indices and landscape measurements around a montanious city in China. The paper suggests that examining such relationships should help to provide management strategies to help the conservation of biodiversity in urban-rural gradients. However, the paper needs to be improved to become a robust contribution. I will present several suggestions that should help the authors to improve their contribution.

 

1) There are three questions the authors propose to answer. These ideas are the paper's core and consequently, all sections should revolve around them. However, they are not presented in the abstract. The abstract should also provide answers to the research questions. The authors should consider building an introduction focused on providing the context that will allow the reader to understand the logic behind the three questions. I suggest using one paragraph to present the general context of the work and the problem and then building a particular paragraph in the introduction for each research question.

 

2) The document is too wordy. The authors must present the most relevant information to build their arguments. I have highlighted in the text some sentences that need to be re-written and information and should be removed from the paper, but the authors need to make a serious effort in writing a more focused contribution.

 

3) The results are not presented clearly and need reworking. I could not evaluate most of the figures presented in the results section. In general, the figures and tables of the paper do not provide informative legends. Tables and figures should be understood independently from the main text. I strongly suggest the authors follow the suggestions in Kroodsma, D. E. 2000. A quick fix for figure legends and table headings. The Auk 117:1081-1083.

 

4) In the discussion section the author has to compare its results with those available in the literature. This exercise should highlight the value of the contribution. In the "Results and Discussion" section the authors did not cite anybody's work, and the reader will find cites only in the "Study limitations" section. Thus, the discussion is very, very limited. I strongly suggest separating Results and Discussion, or including a particular paragraph where you discuss, as indicated earlier.

 

Additional specific comments are included in the pdf file.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The paper should be proofed by a native-English speaker.

Author Response

Thank you for your four valuable suggestions and for pointing out the various errors and issues in the paper. Comprehensive revisions have been made, as detailed in the document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Agroforestry has the potential for concurrent intensification and diversification of production and enhanced carbon storage. Furthermore, trees within croplands fertilize and stabilize the soil, and provide numerous benefits to farmers including enhanced income as well as improved food and nutrition security. Small-Scale agroforestry patches (SAP) can have a significant economic importance at an aggregate level. Importantly multiple use management is strong in both community and smallholder agroforestry. As such, this study aims to investigate the transformation characteristics of the landscape patterns of SAP, along with their elements, across urban-rural gradients. The results show that SAP exhibit differentiated conservation and utilization measures across urban-rural gradients. Small patches located far from urban centers may benefit from systematic conservation measures to prevent further fragmentation and erosion in peri-urban areas. 

I think this study is a little progress by focusing on the role of Small-Scale Agroforestry Patches (SAP) in mountain cities. Generally, some revision suggestions are listed below:

1) Change 'Questions' 'Methods' 'Results' 'Conclusions' as normal Abstract format required by the journal Sustainability. You could find examples from the website.

2) Some results is very simple and superficial, such as 'With increased distance from the city, woodland patch area and connectivity increase' 'Landscape pattern transformations of SPA are significantly influenced by artificial factors'. Try to show meaningful findings rather than general description. Current manuscript is more like a plain textbook rather than an interesting and innovative research.

3)  Takeaway for Practice is also encouraged to be included in this paper. It should be clear enough to present your policy recommendations for both local and international practice.

Author Response

Thank you for your three constructive suggestions. We have responded to each point in detail in the attached Word document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article has been substantially revised. Accept in present form.