Examining the Conceptual Model of Potential Urban Development Patch (PUDP), VOCs, and Food Culture in Urban Ecology: A Case in Chengdu, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Reviewer comments:
The author have done an interesting work related to food culture, urban ecology, and geospatial analysis to address a new model of urban renovation. It also contains some useful information for the readers. However, there are some major issues that need to be clarified.
1. The structure of the paper is somewhat confused. This paper has the feel of a report rather than a research paper. And most of the introduction should be consist of lead in, background, argument and essay structure. Therefore, it is recommended to combine the introduction and background.
2. Most of the data analysis in this paper are from Meituan-Dianping. It is recommended to specify the source representative and add supporting materials such as literature.
3. The Highlights section is recommended to be listed.
There are still some details in the paper that need to be revised.
1. Line169-175: “This study aims to ……” should be rewrite in the introduction but not Methodology.
2. Line179-181: “researchers interviewed 150 Chengdu local people with designed questionnaires……” It is recommended to add explanations about the representative of the questionnaire.
3. Line 251-257: The author calculates the emission factors for VOCs and NMHCs. The emission factors comparison within other study should be analysis. Moreover, it is better to list the emission factors to provide reference for other scholars.
4. Line 265: According to the data of Meituan-Dianping, all the restaurants are divided into 4 categories. As your known, the factors affecting the VOCs emissions are diverse, not only the scale of the restaurant, but also fume purification facilities, etc. It is recommended to describe in detail the reasonableness of this classification.
5. Table 2: A short paragraph is recommended to describe the calculation of the estimated VOC emission in each hub.
6. Line 369: The author should not cite the work of others in your conclusion. Otherwise, the conclusion is not to repeat the above research results, but to summarize and extract key points.
7. Pay attention to the problems of abbreviations, singular and plural, subscript:
(1) Line 13: The abbreviation should be consistent with the text and appear once in the abstract, without repetition in line 18 and 24.
(2) Line 40: The POI appears in the main text for the first time. The full name should be written first and then the abbreviation. Please also pay attention to relevant issues in other parts of the paper.
(3) Line 18 and line 50: The VOCs emission should be full text unity. Please check the full paper.
(4) Line 258: VOCi should be VOCi, the subscript is not marked. Please check the full paper.
(5) Line 259: μg/m3 should be μg/m3, the superscript is not marked. Please check the full paper.
(6) Before submitting again, please read the whole paper carefully and avoid punctuation, spelling, unit and other minor problems.
Author Response
The revision response is attached. Please see the attachment.
Thank you very much.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors reported on the effect of traditional food environment and VOC emissions on urban ecology in Chengdu from the macro level, and proposes the future urban ecology strategies for urban land using. The concept is interesting and cool. The manuscript could be suitable for publication after the following reviews:
-Line 132, abbreviations for VOCs are indicated at the beginning of the paper.
-Line 141, the abbreviation of PUDP need not be repeated.
-Line 174-175, the data of Meituan APP is 2017-2018, it is suggested to replace the latest statistics.
-How is urban ecology developing in China?
-Section 3.2.2, Summarize the commonality and difference of VOC environmental characteristics of different scales and types of communities; explain the causes and contribution of VOC pollution in different types of functional areas in cities?
-Section 4, There are significant correlations between VOC exposure and various urban environmental elements in the main urban area of Chengdu, and there are differences in their correlations. The paper should suggest planning guidance for the spatial layout of urban food and beverage as well as road traffic in the context of future urban development.
Author Response
The revision response is attached. Please see the attachment.
Thank you very much.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The content of your manuscript is interesting and unique manuscript (based on what I did not find in searching for possibly similar publications in PubMed) manuscript. The findings/conclusions based on the various kinds of data and approaches used are thought provoking, e.g.,
Learning from the significantly negative correlation between food POI, VOC emissions, and open PUDP, it could be possible that the more open PUDP will likely help reduce VOC emissions. According to the categorization criteria of open PUDP, open PUDP includes an even distribution of hardscape, green space, and water features. It can support citizen, commercial, and cultural activities while maintaining ecological and environmental functions at the same time. In other words, compared to pure landscape PUDP and conflict PUDP, the open PUDP in cities gets a balance between urban and nature, which could control the VOC emissions because of food spots in a gentle but effective way”
and “Some existing studies have addressed that urban green or natural landscape space can reduce urban air pollution. Still, this research proposed a different point of view by studying the relationship between food POI, VOC emissions, and a new concept, “PUDP” comprehensively”
and “This research innovatively integrates the perspectives of food culture, urban ecology, and geospatial analysis to address a new perspective to construct the urban ecological system. This research's results and methods can inspire scholars and practitioners to think the relationship between food culture, air quality control, and urban land use in proposing a sustainable, flexible, reasonable, and design solutions for future cities.”
and “Conclusion: The result indicates the future urban ecology should consider the restaurant location, VOC emissions from restaurant and their relationship to urban land use data as they have a strong relationship.”
I have the following other comments:
1) The topic of “Potential Urban Development Patch” or "PUDP" does not seem to be findable in PubMed or in searches of Google. In addition to what they already have in the manuscript, can the authors please try to identify and consider adding one or more References (publications and/or websites) to the manuscript if they are available?
2) In “2. Background,” “UAV imagery” needs to have UAV defined in the Keywords and when it is mentioned for the first time. UAV = unmanned aerial vehicle? Also, I have the same comment about “GIS.””
3) Minor corrections needed:
a) 20. Chafe, Z. A., Brauer, M., Klimont, Z., Van Dingenen, R., Mehta, S., Rao, S., ... & Smith, K. R. (2014). Household cooking with solid fuels contributes to ambient PM2. 5 air pollution and the burden of disease. Environmental health perspectives, 122(12), 427 1314-1320.
Should be
20. Chafe, Z. A., Brauer, M., Klimont, Z., Van Dingenen, R., Mehta, S., Rao, S., ... & Smith, K. R. (2014). Household cooking with solid fuels contributes to ambient PM2.5 air pollution and the burden of disease. Environmental health perspectives, 122(12), 427 1314-1320.
And
b) Duplicate Reference:
2. Wang, Q., Shen, J., Shen, X., & Du, J. (2018). Volatile organic compounds and odor emissions from alkyd resin enamel-coated particleboard. BioResources, 13(3), 6837-6849.
and
14. Wang, Q., Shen, J., Shen, X., & Du, J. (2018). Volatile organic compounds and odor emissions from alkyd resin enamel-coated particleboard. BioResources, 13(3), 6837-6849.
4) I suggest adding “China” to the Keywords.
Author Response
The revision response is attached. Please see the attachment.
Thank you very much.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please read and check the whole paper before publish.
