Next Article in Journal
Electric Vehicle Transient Speed Control Based on Vector Control FM-PI Speed Controller for Induction Motor
Previous Article in Journal
Safety Risk Assessment of Highway Bridge Construction Based on Cloud Entropy Power Method
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Habitat Destruction and Restoration in Relation to Extinction and Survival of Species in Competitive Communities

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(17), 8693; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12178693
by Kornphong Chonsiripong 1, Eakkapong Duangdai 2, Radom Pongvuthithum 3,4 and Chulin Likasiri 4,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12(17), 8693; https://doi.org/10.3390/app12178693
Submission received: 6 August 2022 / Revised: 28 August 2022 / Accepted: 28 August 2022 / Published: 30 August 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article presents a solution to the important problem of modeling the effects of habitat conditions on species dynamics and the probability of species extinction. During the process of reviewing the manuscript, some comments arose, which are listed below.

I recommend the manuscript for publication after minor improvements.

 

Line 24: An incorrect sentence. Awareness of extinction has existed for a million years? Or prior to a million years was extinction not a cause of extinction?

Lines 25–27: The random distribution of dominant species is a particular variant of their distribution and is not a obligatory pattern.

Line 27. What is the relationship between the random distribution of dominant species and the biased extinction of rare species?

Lines 105–106. The term of the equation f(t)p1 (and f(t)pi) must have a coefficient; a coefficient equal to unity is an unreasonable generalization. This coefficient is nothing but the sensitivity of the species to habitat destruction.

Line 108: Colonization is a term that refers to the invasion of a species into new habitats. The expansion of a species' presence in a given habitat is dispersion.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

This article presents a solution to the important problem of modeling the effects of habitat conditions on species dynamics and the probability of species extinction. During the process of reviewing the manuscript, some comments arose, which are listed below.

I recommend the manuscript for publication after minor improvements.

  1. Line 24: An incorrect sentence. Awareness of extinction has existed for a million years? Or prior to a million years was extinction not a cause of extinction

Response: The first sentence in Line 24 has been rewritten to make it clearer.

  1. Lines 25–27: The random distribution of dominant species is a particular variant of their distribution and is not a obligatory pattern

Response: The first paragraph has been rewritten. In the line 25-27 we try to explain that the dominant species are abundant. Chances are they are spread across the habitat and may be partly undisturbed by habitat loss unless the habitat is total destroyed that they could be extinct.

  1. Line 27. What is the relationship between the random distribution of dominant species and the biased extinction of rare species

Response: The first paragraph has been rewritten to make it clearer. Here we try to explain that we assume that the extinction rate is biased toward rarer species.

  1. Lines 105–106. The term of the equation f(t)p1(and f(t)pi) must have a coefficient; a coefficient equal to unity is an unreasonable generalization. This coefficient is nothing but the sensitivity of the species to habitat destruction

Response: Thank you for the comment. In this paper, we propose this simple form of f(t) to show the significance of this term. In the future, this work can be extended to include a more general form of f(t) in which constants can be included and more detailed studies can be carried out.

           

 

  1. Line 108: Colonization is a term that refers to the invasion of a species into new habitats. The expansion of a species' presence in a given habitat is dispersion.

Response: To clarify this point, we had added more explanation to the sentence in line 113-114.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Abstract need to be further elaborated, it is small.

2. Introduction is lengthier and only relevant model related to recent model could be mentioned.

3. Sub headings could be in bold format.

4. Results and  conclusion are well explained.

5. In line no 87. et al will  come in place of el al.

6. Grammer could be improved further.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer#2

  1. Abstract need to be further elaborated, it is small.

Response: The abstract has been extended.

  1. Introduction is lengthier and only relevant model related to recent model could be mentioned.

Response: The most recent relevant model is referred in line 77 (Dri [20], 2021).

  1. Sub headings could be in bold format.

Response: We have used the format provided by the journal. In this journal, subheading is in the italic format.

  1. Results and conclusion are well explained.

Response: Thank you for your comments.

  1. In line no 87. et al will come in place of el al.

Response: Thank you for spotting this. In line 93, el al has been corrected to et al.

  1. Grammer could be improved further.

 Response: The writing has been rechecked for grammatical correctness.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop