Characteristics of Changes in Livestock Numbers and Densities in the Selinco Region of the Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau from 1990 to 2020
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis revised manuscript is better. Specific comments are as follow.
Introduction
Line 88. Please add hypotheses or objectives of this paper.
Discussion
Line 254. Please improve this section by connecting your research with other related researches. Discussion is not a repeat of Result section.
Author Response
Reviewer 1
This revised manuscript is better. Specific comments are as follow.
Response: Dear Editors, Thank you for your kind letter and your careful work regarding our manuscript. We have revised the manuscript in accordance with the reviewer’s comments. And point-by-point responses to the comments were as follows:
Introduction
- Line 88. Please add hypotheses or objectives of this paper.
Response: Thanks for your comments, and much appreciated. In response, we have added the following section outlining the hypotheses and objectives of this paper（line 80-88 ）:
Hypotheses：“Research on fluctuations in livestock numbers and densities is particular-ly vital in this framework, owing to the intricate interactions between livestock and the ecosystem.”line82-84
Objectives：“This will provide a foundation for future environmental protection and economic development policies in the region.” line86-88
Discussion
- Line 254. Please improve this section by connecting your research with other related researches. Discussion is not a repeat of Result section.
Response: Thank you very much, your comments are much appreciated. Since this study is based on fundamental livestock numbers, it may not be entirely realistic to correlate it directly with other related research. However, this section still had some deficiencies, which I have now addressed through additional supplements and revisions. Specifically, the analysis of influencing factors has been moved to the results section. Moreover, the third paragraph of this section has been thoroughly revised to better align with the topic under discussion. All changes have been marked in the revision mode.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
Thank you for the revised version.
Overall it is better now. However, there are still many flaws that need to be improved.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
English is more or less correct. However, I by myself am not a native speaker.
Author Response
For all responses, please see the word document below.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsMy seven notes resulting from my review are included in the attached pdf of the manuscript, on pages 3, 5, 8, and 9. I'm copying the last note and pasting it below:
After a new review, I would like to emphasize the need for a more robust analytical approach in this manuscript. The authors have acknowledged the limitations of the geographic scope and outlined their future research plans, which I appreciate. However, it is important to consider the application of multivariate analyses. Even though the study covers only six regions, utilizing multivariate methods such as multiple regression or principal component analysis can still be beneficial. This would help control the interdependence of variables, including the set of edaphoclimatic variables and the sets of herd and socio-economic data, providing a clearer view of the factors influencing livestock density. Implementing this approach would strengthen the validity of the results and eliminate possible confounding effects.
Furthermore, a multivariate analysis would not only complement findings based on simple correlations but also provide a solid basis for future comparisons when data is available at a finer spatial resolution, as mentioned in the authors' response and manuscript. Simple correlation may not adequately capture the interrelationships among the studied variables, potentially leading to misleading interpretations of the relative importance of the factors.
I recommend:
1. Inclusion of Multivariate Analysis.
2. Documentation of Limitations: If multivariate analysis is not feasible at present, I suggest that the authors document the limitations of simple correlation analysis in the manuscript, emphasizing the need for more complex approaches in future studies.
3. Revision of Conclusions: The authors may consider revising the conclusions to reflect the methodological limitations better.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
For all responses, please see the word document below.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an interesting study on the pattern and potential affecting factors for livestock number variation over the past 30 years (1990-2020) in the Selinco region of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Based on solid livestock number data and associated environmental and social-economic data, this study provided a detailed and reasonable explanation for the livestock number variation, which may be helpful for livestock management policy making in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and other similar grazing ecosystems across the world. The manuscript is well structured and smoothly written. But considerable revision is important to improve the quality of the manuscript before it can be published. Specific comments are detailed below.
Title
Line 1. I think the title can be more straightforward, to make it easier to read.
Introduction
Line 110. Please add hypotheses or objectives of this paper.
Materials and Methods
Line 111. Please collect more potential affecting factors such as 1) price of each livestock over the past 30 years (1990-2020), 2) NDVI, 3) grassland coverage percent of each county and others. And then try their correlations with the number of livestock in your study area.
Line 142. Forage-livestock balance policy may be an important affecting factor, so please show the policies in a better way such as table or figure.
Results
Line 259. Figure 2 (and Figure 4 as well), please use a better Y axis range. For example, in most cases, the Y axis should begin from “0”.
Line 279. Figure 3, please delete this figure or show it in better way.
Line 445. More quantitative analysis, such as correlation analysis and structure equation model, are important to explore the potential affecting factors for livestock number variation over the past 30 years quantitatively.
Line 447. “Analysis of Spatial and Temporal Variations in Grazing Activities and Their Influential Factors”: please rewrite this section. Discussion is not a repeat of result section.
Line 513. Please delete this section or shorten it considerably. Please show the readers what you found.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear colleagues,
thank you for the manuscript that I had been reviewing.
I am afraid to confess to you that I am not satisfied with the content. I would like to reason it.
To correlate variables such as depending variabe "stocking rate" (in your words "grazing intensity") with the number of humans and rainfall over a time might is possible, however, of limited scientific value. The same is true for the (expected) finding that administrative prohibitions or limitations regarding the number of animals kept lead to their decrease. I still wonder how you defined the productivity of grasslands as pasture or meadow and where you present corresponding data. Instead, you draw a magic link between the measures of husbandry policy between some 1990-2020, the stocking rate and the carrying capacity of the study region without distinguishing between the single animal husbandry species and its demands and effects on grasslands. Most surprisingly, you conclude that the policy of restricting animal numbers according to grassland productivity was effective and positive.
Please constrict on clear results, do not mix discussion and results. Shorten your text, delete abundant figures.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Sometimes you need improvement. Please contact a professional English proof reader.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript titled "Grazing Dynamics in the Selinco Region: Informing Livestock Management Policies for the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau" outlines the study's objective in lines 104 to 109:
“To comprehensively investigate the complex influencing mechanisms behind grazing activities, we simultaneously included various factors such as policy measures, population dynamics, economic indicators, temperature, precipitation, and altitude in the study area. This multifactorial analytical approach allows for a nuanced exploration of the underlying patterns of grazing activity and provides a solid basis for the formulation of science-based grazing management policies.”
While we are unable to access the appendices, it's worth noting that the authors have a substantial database at their disposal. However, the manuscript could benefit from more in-depth analyses. To truly understand the mechanisms behind grazing activities, the work should incorporate a more comprehensive analysis, potentially using a multifactorial approach to identify the impact of policy measures, economic and population dynamics, and edaphoclimatic factors. These factors are crucial in hypotheses explaining the dynamics of grazing intensity.
While unidimensional regression analysis may be useful in understanding the impact of public policy on a specific factor while keeping others constant, it is important to stress the necessity of a more complex approach when dealing with a series of interrelated factors. This approach, which involves reexamining and reanalyzing the data, will more comprehensively address the postulated hypotheses and enhance the manuscript's scientific rigor.
It is important to note that the manuscript's presentation of figures needs improvement. Specifically, some figures could be converted into tables to facilitate the reader's understanding of the information presented. Additionally, the overall manuscript writing requires revision, as some information tends to be repetitive throughout the text. Identifying and revising these sections will significantly improve the manuscript's overall quality.
