Landscape Pattern Identification and Ecological Risk Assessment Employing Land Use Dynamics on the Loess Plateau

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

An interesting study indicating the Land Use evolution at  Loess Plateau region. Fragmentation. landscape diversity and the landscape ecological risk are among the parameters used to explore the performance of the decision making in the area since 2000.

Well structured and well documented work, nicely presented in text and language. 

However, Major issues are:

1. The landscape fragility Indicator appears to have a unique value per land use type.  This needs a convincing explanation. Do all forest show the same behavior during disturbances? i.e. the LU transition, in exactly the same land unit, ForestA - OtherLU - ForestB does not affect the system fragility to external disturbances? Is the landscape fragility of ForestA and ForestB the same?

2. Second major issue is addressed with paragraph 4. Several discussed issues are unsupported and not obviously related to the results of current analysis. How are the given recommendations (i.e. advanced engineering projects, irrigation practices...) relate to the findings of current study? How is defined the high quality ecological development? How can regional development objectives be proposed when the assessment is based on "universal" or "unique", for the whole study area, risk indicator? The differentiated measures discussed in lines 272 - 273 seem contradictory to the harmonized risk governance (286 - 287). And again, how can measures be differentiated when the risks (i.e. the landscape fragility) are evaluated based on "unique" values (please see previous comment)?

Overall, paragraph 4 needs some reconsideration

Minor issues 

Line 236: for consistency replace number of patches with NP

Line 239: SPLIT explanation is possibly missing. Please check any other missing abbreviation

Figure 4: although it is a matter pf preference, typically green colors represent a positive entity and red a negative. However here low risk colored red and high risk is colored green. This may be misleading to the reader

Author Response

Comments from the reviewer 1 :

An interesting study indicating the Land Use evolution at Loess Plateau region. Fragmentation. landscape diversity and the landscape ecological risk are among the parameters used to explore the performance of the decision making in the area since 2000. Well structured and well documented work, nicely presented in text and language. 

1.The landscape fragility Indicator appears to have a unique value per land use type. This needs a convincing explanation. Do all forest show the same behavior during disturbances? i.e. the LU transition, in exactly the same land unit, ForestA - Other LU - Forest B does not affect the system fragility to external disturbances? Is the landscape fragility of Forest A and Forest B the same?

Response: Thank you for your thoughtful comment regarding the landscape fragility indicator and its unique value per land use type. Your question about the consistency of forest behavior during disturbances and the potential impact of land use transitions on fragility is important. While forests generally share common ecological principles, their behavior during disturbances can be influenced by various factors such as species composition, ecosystem structure, historical disturbance regimes, and local environmental conditions. These variations can lead to divergent responses to disturbances, which in turn can result in different landscape fragility indicators for different forest types. Our study draws on previous research methods to identify landscape features on a macroscopic scale. However, there are limitations in characterizing micro-level features. Particularly, when it comes to representing finer ecological characteristics, such as land use transitions involving changes in species composition, structural attributes, and overall ecosystem dynamics, these variations can influence the landscape's response to external disturbances. In future research, we would focus on addressing the complexity of the unique value of landscape vulnerability indicators in different land use types. Your input is valuable in enhancing the scientific rigor and clarity of our work. If you have any further insights or questions, please feel free to share them. Your expertise is highly valued as we refine our research.

2.Second major issue is addressed with paragraph 4. Several discussed issues are unsupported and not obviously related to the results of current analysis. How are the given recommendations (i.e. advanced engineering projects, irrigation practices...) relate to the findings of current study? How is defined the high quality ecological development? How can regional development objectives be proposed when the assessment is based on "universal" or "unique", for the whole study area, risk indicator? The differentiated measures discussed in lines 272 - 273 seem contradictory to the harmonized risk governance (286 - 287). And again, how can measures be differentiated when the risks (i.e. the landscape fragility) are evaluated based on "unique" values (please see previous comment)? Overall, paragraph 4 needs some reconsideration.

Response: Thank you for your very constructive comments on our manuscript. We understand the need to clearly establish the link between the study's findings and the recommendations provided. We will revisit this section and revise it to provide a more explicit and cohesive connection between the analysis and the proposed measures. Specifically, based on comments from some reviewers and editors, we have revised it as “Ecological risk control in the Loess Plateau region has made preliminary progress, which is closely related to ecological restoration projects such as soil and water conservation, small watershed management, natural forest protection, reforestation (grassland), and terraced land improvement[28]. A series of ecological restoration projects have to some extent adjusted the land use structure and improved the ecological conditions for social production [29]. However, localized ecological degradation issues still persist in certain areas of the region. With the accelerated process of urbanization, there has been a rapid expansion in the demand for construction land, and human activities have intensified land fragmentation and occupation of cropland[30].

Currently, a fully functional and well-circulated regional ecosystem, characterized by efficient cycling processes, has not yet been fully established in the Loess Plateau region. To achieve high-quality ecological development in this area, there is a need to strengthen ecological governance and consolidate the ecological foundation. In accordance with the specific characteristics of the Loess Plateau and its regional development objectives, it is imperative to comprehensively implement differentiated ecological governance measures that encompass a comprehensive range of governance elements and are scientifically sound in their allocation. It is recommended to pragmatically advance engineering projects such as silt retention dams, slope terracing, and gully treatment and land reclamation based on local conditions. Building upon the principles of natural laws and available resources, it is essential to implement appropriate afforestation, efficient irrigation practices, suitable grassland management, and appropriate land fallow policies. Furthermore, scientific land improvement, the establishment of high-standard farmlands, conservation, and restoration of forest vegetation should be conducted. A coordinated approach that integrates high-quality governance and ecological engineering projects for mountains, rivers, forests, croplands, lakes, grasslands, sand, and soil would facilitate the restoration of ecosystem functions, comprehensively optimize the ecological environment of the Loess Plateau, and solidify the foundation for the sustainable operation of the ecosystem.

The coordination and harmonization of ecological risk governance with the high-quality development of the economy and society require a regional approach that takes into account the ecological risks and resource endowments, guiding the construction of green ecological industry clusters in the Loess Plateau region. In areas with high ecological risks, there should be a shift towards stock renewal and intensive and efficient utilization of construction land and cropland, while comprehensively protecting ecological land such as forests, grasslands, and water area. In areas with moderate ecological risks, the leading role of spatial planning should be fully utilized to balance the distribution of different types of land, integrate and match natural endowments with production factors, reduce the negative impacts of economic development on the environment, and maintain or even improve the current level of ecological risk. In areas with low ecological risks, it is necessary to strategically plan green industry clusters, strengthen infrastructure construction, leverage the comparative advantages of green ecological industries, and establish intensive and high-value green agricultural industry clusters focused on crops (such as millet, barley), fruits (such as apples, dates), edible fungi, and specialty plants (such as Chinese wolfberry, sea buckthorn, hops). Additionally, it is important to establish agro-pastoral industry clusters primarily focused on feed, meat production (such as beef and mutton), dairy industry, and cashmere production, as well as protecting grassland agricultural industry clusters. Simultaneously, it is essential to promote the integration of regional industrial development with soil and water conservation, agricultural water conservancy construction, and circular economy projects, while supporting the development of new technologies, new formats, and new models that are environmentally friendly.” Your feedback guides us in refining the discussion, making it more robust and logically consistent. If you have any further insights, specific recommendations, or questions, please do not hesitate to share them.

3.Line 236: for consistency replace number of patches with NP.

Response: Thank you for your comment on our manuscript. We have revised it.

4.Line 239: SPLIT explanation is possibly missing. Please check any other missing abbreviation.

Response: Thank you for your very constructive comments on our manuscript. You're absolutely right, providing explanations for abbreviations is crucial to the understanding of the readers. We will review the manuscript to identify any other missing abbreviations that need clarification, and we will ensure that all necessary explanations are provided in a comprehensive manner. We revised it as “The selected indices include the number of patches (NP), patch density (PD), edge density (ED), landscape shape index (LSI), average patch area (Area_MN), shannon diversity index (SHDI) and splitting index (SPLIT).”

5.Figure 4: although it is a matter pf preference, typically green colors represent a positive entity and red a negative. However here low risk colored red and high risk is colored green. This may be misleading to the reader.

Response: Thank you for your very constructive comments on our manuscript. We appreciate your consideration of color associations and their potential impact on reader interpretation. Your point about the color scheme aligning with common conventions is well-taken. We are more attentive to color coding choices in representations to avoid any potential confusion.

Reviewer 2 Report

In this study, land use data from 2000,2010 and 2020 on the Loess Plateau was used to assess the spatial and temporal changes in land use patterns and landscape ecological risks. The findings provide valuable reference and decision-making support for high-quality development in the Loess Plateau. The relevant suggestions are as follows:

 Introduction: This part has devoted a lot of space to the introduction of the Loess Plateau region . However, what is the current situation of the relevant research on landscape pattern identification and ecological risk assessment employing land use dynamics in China or other countries. what is the deficiency, what is the difference in this study, where is the innovation, these need to be elaborated. In addition, what is the significance of this work, and what reference value can be provided for China or other countries in the world. Finally, the purpose of this paper is to suggest that it should be listed in sections.

 2.2. Data source: Why did the land use data choose 2000, 2010 and 2020? is it representative? It is suggested that the author give the response explanation.

 Recommendations for high-quality development on the Loess Plateau: On the whole, this part looks like the scientific research report, not the form of the paper. In general, after writing "3. Results", you should write a discussion section, such as analyzing the causes of landscape pattern differences, etc., instead of giving some suggestions directly.

In addition, the content of the proposal is too much, it is suggested to be concise and briefly explained in sections.

Conclusion: The current conclusions are more like an elaboration of the content of the study. The recommended conclusions focus on with the identification of the causes of differences in Landscape pattern on the Loess Plateau, as well as the ecological risk assessment. What needs to be improved in the future research? It is suggested that the author sort it out one by one.

Overall recommendation: major revision.

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Comments from the reviewer 2:

In this study, land use data from 2000,2010 and 2020 on the Loess Plateau was used to assess the spatial and temporal changes in land use patterns and landscape ecological risks. The findings provide valuable reference and decision-making support for high-quality development in the Loess Plateau. The relevant suggestions are as follows:

1. Introduction: This part has devoted a lot of space to the introduction of the Loess Plateau region. However, what is the current situation of the relevant research on landscape pattern identification and ecological risk assessment employing land use dynamics in China or other countries. what is the deficiency, what is the difference in this study, where is the innovation, these need to be elaborated. In addition, what is the significance of this work, and what reference value can be provided for China or other countries in the world. Finally, the purpose of this paper is to suggest that it should be listed in sections.

Response: Thank you for your detailed feedback on the "Introduction" section. Your insights are valuable, and we appreciate your thoughtful suggestions for improvement.

We recognize the importance of providing a comprehensive understanding of the research context. We have expanded the introduction to include references to literature on landscape pattern identification and ecological risk assessment. By doing so, our aim is to emphasize the novelty and uniqueness of our study in addressing these gaps. We revised it as “Against the backdrop of ecological conservation and high-quality development becoming a national strategic in the Yellow River Basin, a comprehensive understanding of the changing ecological conditions and the distribution of ecological risks in the Loess Plateau region can provide decision-making support for regional ecological management and risk prevention [1]. Initially, ecological risk assessment was primarily employed to evaluate environmental pollution processes associated with individual sources of risk [2-4]. However, in recent years, with the continuous development of theories and models of ecological risk assessment, research on ecological risk assessment has increasingly focused on the general impact of ecosystems and the spatial characteristics of ecological risks, expanding the scale of assessment to the regional level [5,6]. Furthermore, as research progresses, ecological risk assessment based on the perspective of land use, utilizing landscape indices and relative risk models as the main approaches, has gradually become the mainstream method [7-9]. Some studies have utilized various landscape pattern indices to construct ecological risk indices, thereby evaluating ecological risks at different scales such as regional cities [10,11] and watersheds [12]. Based on the assessment of ecological risks at the county level, Hou et al. and Li et al. further analyzed the driving factors of ecological risks and proposed corresponding risk prevention and control strategies [13] and [14]. In general, the evaluation methods and assessment systems for analyzing ecological risks through the establishment of evaluation models have reached a certain level of maturity. However, these approaches primarily focus on single factors or specific issues related to regional development [15], lacking comprehensive research that systematically reflects the spatio-temporal characteristics of the ecological patterns in the Loess Plateau region. As a result, a unified consideration of regional ecological risk governance in the Loess Plateau region has not yet been established.”

We understand the importance of highlighting the broader significance of our research and its potential implications. By emphasizing the practical applications and potential benefits of our study, we aim to convey its relevance and reference value more effectively. We revised it as “Based on this premise, this study utilizes land-use data from 2000, 2010, and 2020 in the Loess Plateau region to analyze the temporal and spatial variations of land-use patterns in northern Shaanxi area over a long time series. This is achieved through the calculation of landscape pattern indices and the construction of an ecological risk assessment model at the grid scale. The study aims to reveal and diagnose the spatio-temporal differentiation of ecological risks in the region. Based on these findings, ecological risk zones are delineated, and targeted suggestions for ecological governance, zoning and control in the Loess Plateau region are proposed. This quantitative analysis and decision-making framework aim to provide valuable reference and decision-making support for ecological risk prevention and control as well as high-quality development in the Loess Plateau.”

By incorporating these changes, we intend to enhance the clarity, relevance, and overall impact of the "Introduction" section. We appreciate your feedback as it contributes to the refinement of our research.

2. Data source: Why did the land use data choose 2000, 2010 and 2020? is it representative? It is suggested that the author give the response explanation.

Response: Thank you for your insightful question regarding the choice of land use data years (2000, 2010, and 2020) for the study. Your query about the representativeness of these years is pertinent, and I appreciate the opportunity to address it. The selection of these specific years was made based on careful consideration of several factors. These years mark significant intervals that allow us to capture the spatiotemporal dynamics of land use changes on the Loess Plateau. A decade-long span provides a comprehensive view of the landscape transformations that might have occurred over time. In response to your concern about the representativeness of the chosen years, we intend to provide a more detailed explanation in the methodology or data sources section of the paper. This explanation will highlight the significance of these years in capturing the dynamics of land use changes during these periods.

3. Recommendations for high-quality development on the Loess Plateau: On the whole, this part looks like the scientific research report, not the form of the paper. In general, after writing "Results", you should write a discussion section, such as analyzing the causes of landscape pattern differences, etc., instead of giving some suggestions directly.In addition, the content of the proposal is too much, it is suggested to be concise and briefly explained in sections.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback on the section regarding recommendations for high-quality development on the Loess Plateau. We appreciate your thoughtful insights and suggestions, which are instrumental in refining the structure and content of the paper. We understand your perspective that the current content resembles a scientific research report rather than adhering to the format of a paper. In light of this, we will take steps to enhance the paper's coherence and flow. As you suggested, we will transform the "Results" section into a comprehensive "Discussion" section, where we will analyze the underlying causes of landscape pattern differences and provide more in-depth insights into our findings. Furthermore, we recognize the importance of brevity in presenting the proposal's content. We will ensure that the proposed recommendations are concise yet still effectively convey the essential information required for the high-quality development of the Loess Plateau. Your feedback is invaluable in guiding us towards creating a more coherent and impactful paper. We are committed to incorporating your suggestions to enhance the manuscript's structure and clarity.

4. Conclusion: The current conclusions are more like an elaboration of the content of the study. The recommended conclusions focus on with the identification of the causes of differences in Landscape pattern on the Loess Plateau, as well as the ecological risk assessment. What needs to be improved in the future research? It is suggested that the author sort it out one by one.

Response: Thank you for your insightful feedback on the conclusion of our study. We appreciate your thoughtful assessment and will take your suggestions into consideration to enhance the conclusion section. We revised the conclusion to ensure it reflects a more focused and forward-looking perspective, highlighting the identified causes of landscape variations and their implications for future research and ecological risk management. We add and revised it as “In the future, continuous coordination of high-quality governance of mountains, rivers, forests, cropland, lakes, grasslands, and sand, along with ecological engineering construction, is crucial for improving the ecological environment of the Loess Plateau, laying a solid foundation for regional production, and leading the high-quality development of green ecological industrial clusters in the region.”

We genuinely appreciate your contribution to refining the quality of our research, and we are committed to incorporating your suggestions to create a conclusion section that provides a comprehensive and insightful summary of our findings. If you have any further insights or specific recommendations, please do not hesitate to share them. Your expertise is greatly valued in advancing the scholarly impact of our work.

Reviewer 3 Report

Please see the attached. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Minor editing of English language is required over the whole text. 

Author Response

Comments from the reviewer 3:

This study is aimed at developing a model for assessing the ecological risk based on the landscape disturbance and vulnerability. It can be useful for managing an extensive area such as the Loess Plateau. Methodology and results from this study were well organized. The use of this model is well discussed in the discussion section.

There are some issues to be revised. For the equations stated in this study, the variables and symbols should be explained after the equations in a consistent way. All the tables and figures should be mentioned in the text. With the interpretation of the tables and figures, the meaning of the interpretation should be explained in depth. Then readers can understand the research better. In the abstract, research purpose needs to be added.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback on the manuscript. We appreciate your thorough assessment of the study's strengths and areas for improvement. Your insights are crucial in enhancing the quality and clarity of our research.

We have taken note of your comments and will make the necessary revisions to address the issues you've raised. Specifically, we will ensure that the equations presented in the study are accompanied by clear explanations of the variables and symbols used, following a consistent format. Additionally, we will ensure that all tables and figures are appropriately referenced in the text and that their interpretations are provided in-depth to facilitate a better understanding of the research findings.

Your suggestion to include the research purpose in the abstract will be implemented to provide readers with a concise overview of the study's objectives. So, we revised it as “The Loess Plateau region is characterized by fragmented habitats and ecological vulnerability. Analyzing the changes in land use and ecological risk within the region is of great significance for promoting high-quality development of the Loess Plateau. The study utilized land use data from 2000, 2010, and 2020 in the Loess Plateau region to assess the spatio-temporal variation in land use patterns and landscape ecological risks, aiming to provide valuable references and decision support for ecological risk management and sustainable development in the area.”. We believe that incorporating these changes will enhance the overall comprehensibility and scholarly value of the manuscript.

Thank you once again for your thoughtful review, which will undoubtedly contribute to the refinement of our research for a broader audience. If you have any further suggestions or specific points you'd like us to address, please do not hesitate to let us know.