Spatiotemporal Changes and Driver Analysis of Ecosystem Respiration in the Tibetan and Inner Mongolian Grasslands
, Lili Feng 1,2, Yan Lv 1,2, Qingqing Chang 1,2, Qian Xu 1,2, Mengyu Zhang 1,2, Yonghong Zhang 6 and Tianxiang Wang 6
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
There are too figures in the MS.
Author Response
There are too figures in the MS.
[Response] Thank you for this comment. For brevity and flow of the manuscript, we have moved Figures 4, 6 and 12 from the original manuscript into the Supplementary Materials.
Reviewer 2 Report
Did you detect plagiarism? Although I checked No, I did find a lot of similarity of descriptions in this manuscript and in reference [34] (Figure 1 is the same, and Table 1 is very similar). I assume that the major contributors to the two papers are the same.
See attached file for more comments.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank the authors for the detailed response and explanation. Everything looks good except for Entry 4 of the Major Comments, on the relationship or R^2 and RMSE. Here is my understanding:
Both measures are related to the observed values and the predicted values, regardless of the details of the prediction models or predictors (inputs). Unless the change of inputs leads to change of the number of observations in the problem, the relationship between R^2 and RMSE is still valid. In other words, if “n” is the same in your Equations (4) and (5), what I said is valid. Of course, due to the change of inputs, the number of observations involved in each model could be different. That is the key, and I do not see the description (in the response) on this.
