Investigating Planting Concrete Suitability by Evaluating the Physiological Indexes of Three Ground Cover Plants
, Wei Lin 3, Chengcheng Zeng 3, Nian Li 1, Xiaoxia Zhang 1, Li Guo 1 and Qibing Chen 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
My remarks relate to porous/pervious/planting concrete as a material as follows:
- the first paragraph of your paper is confusing, it does not lead us to the topic .... what you call planting concrete here is actually pervius concrete in civil engineering, so maybe for an introduction you can take the basic things about pervious concrete, its advantages and disadvantages from the paper available at the following link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950061818305208?via%3Dihub
-in the introduction, the authors mark planting concrete once with PC, then with EC…. it is necessary to harmonize the terminology throughout the text.
-the data on the size and density of aggregate are given 2 times, first time under the title 2 and the second time under the title 2.1 – please, remove this data from the title 2 and leave it just under the title 2.1
- stacking density is a non-existent term in civil engineering (PC is still a building material), it is bulk density – please, correct it throughout the text
- please, describe the process of planting concrete preparation. It is unclear what is done with plant concrete reinforcer ... do you mix it into the concrete? Why do you call it „reinforcer“ at all? In civil engineering, „reinforcement“ is a steel bar built into concrete.
-there are two different water quantities (for two different concrete mixes) and one cement quantity in Table 3 but only one water to cement ratio – this is not possible since the water to cement ratio is the ratio of mass of water and the mass of cement…there must be two water to cement ratios in your case. Beside, the amount of aggregate in Table 3 corresponds to the „stacking density“ of aggregate… is this a coincidence?
-the abbreviation for water to cement ratio is w/c ratio, not WCR
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Dear reviewer:
Wish you and your family happy new year!
Thank you for your review and suggestions on my manuscript. Your professionalism and attitude are a great boost to my paper and my future work. Thank you again!
Point 1: The first paragraph of your paper is confusing, it does not lead us to the topic .... what you call planting concrete here is actually pervius concrete in civil engineering, so maybe for an introduction you can take the basic things about pervious concrete, its advantages and disadvantages from the paper available at the following link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950061818305208?via%3Dihub
Response 1: Thank you for providing the references that I have read, quoted and promoted my introduction section in the manuscript.
Point 2: In the introduction, the authors mark planting concrete once with PC, then with EC…. it is necessary to harmonize the terminology throughout the text.
Response 2: Your advice makes great sense, and I have corrected it in the manuscript.
Point 3: The data on the size and density of aggregate are given 2 times, first time under the title 2 and the second time under the title 2.1 – please, remove this data from the title 2 and leave it just under the title 2.1
Response 3: Thanks for your opinion, I found the problem and have corrected in the manuscript.
Point 4: Stacking density is a non-existent term in civil engineering (PC is still a building material), it is bulk density – please, correct it throughout the text
Response 4: Thanks, I have revised it in the manuscript.
Point 5: please, describe the process of planting concrete preparation. It is unclear what is done with plant concrete reinforcer ... do you mix it into the concrete? Why do you call it „reinforcer“ at all? In civil engineering, „reinforcement“ is a steel bar built into concrete.
Response 5: I have completed in the second preparation part of the manuscript. Thank you.
Point 6: There are two different water quantities (for two different concrete mixes) and one cement quantity in Table 3 but only one water to cement ratio – this is not possible since the water to cement ratio is the ratio of mass of water and the mass of cement…there must be two water to cement ratios in your case. Beside, the amount of aggregate in Table 3 corresponds to the „stacking density“ of aggregate… is this a coincidence?
Response 6: Sorry for the carelessness I have corrected it in the manuscript.
Point 7: The abbreviation for water to cement ratio is w/c ratio, not WCR
Response 7: Thank you for your professional advice, I have corrected it in the text.
Reviewer 2 Report
1. Please explain the influence of PC reinforcer (VPR) on the planting concrete, including the pH and mechanical properties of the concrete.
2.As for the alkalinity test of PC, the crushed concrete block will be tested after grinding, but in practice, the surface of concrete is in contact with plants. Therefore, it is recommended to measure the pH of leaching inside concrete.
3.Please explain why the strength of 5-10 mm size concrete is greater than that of 10-15 mm size concrete.
4.Please give the concrete strength and porosity data of each experimental group.
5.In this paper, it is considered that the compressive strength of PC has little relationship with porosity, which is different from other experimental conclusions. Please give a detailed explanation.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Dear reviewer:
Wish you and your family happy new year!
Thank you for your review and suggestions on my manuscript. Your professionalism and attitude are a great assistance to our paper and future work.
Point 1: Please explain the influence of PC reinforcer (VPR) on the planting concrete, including the pH and mechanical properties of the concrete.
Response 1: Sorry for no full introduction before, I have made the part of text complete and fixed in the manuscript.
Point 2: As for the alkalinity test of PC, the crushed concrete block will be tested after grinding, but in practice, the surface of concrete is in contact with plants. Therefore, it is recommended to measure the pH of leaching inside concrete.
Response 2: Your advice makes great sense, properties within the concrete are essential for plant root growth. I have also thought about this issue after the experiment, and we will fully consider and take your suggestions in the future research.
Point 3: Please explain why the strength of 5-10 mm size concrete is greater than that of 10-15 mm size concrete.
Response 3: Thanks for your opinion, I have cited the relevant literature to explained it in the first paragraph, section 3 in the manuscript.
Point 4: Please give the concrete strength and porosity data of each experimental group.
Response 4: I will respond this point with the next(Point 5), appreciate.
Point 5: In this paper, it is considered that the compressive strength of PC has little relationship with porosity, which is different from other experimental conclusions. Please give a detailed explanation.
Response 5: First, thanks for your patience, I will explain these two points. Actually we had a parallel-experiment mainly focused on the planting concrete manufacturing along with this experiment. The original data of the parallel-experiment is in the attachment (Excel file named Original data). However, the main purpose of this test was aim to explore the adaptive mechanism of plants on PC, so that this part of data was not placed in the manuscript.
We grouped the specimens by different aggregate particle sizes and different w/c ratios, the detailed proportion method is placed in the attachment. Based on the proportion method, we manufactured two hundred specimens with different w/c ratios and particle sizes, each ten was one set(one more specimen aims for fault tolerance). We performed the relevant physical property tests for each specimen, the data are all presented in the file. The two chosen groups we have shown in the manuscript(Tagged in yellow in the attachment) had best performance during the test. When we brought the total group data (LC and SC, 100 specimens each) with different particle sizes into the analysis, we found a significant negative correlation between the compressive strength and porosity which makes common sense (SC 10 sets: p < 0.05, r = - 0.256*, LC 10 sets: p < 0.05, r = - 0.218*). However, we amazedly found that they had little correlation after bringing the data from two selected groups into correlation analysis as you mentioned, data were shown as a no-significant negative correlation. We discussed and speculated that it may be related to the amount of additives but there are no articles we found that can support this view. The relevant literature in planting concrete is much less available than conventional, so we did not put much emphasis on this phenomenon in consideration of being not to deviate from the main purpose of this article.
We will pay attention to this phenomenon in future studies. We hope you can understand and give us your professional advice. Thank you again!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The author's reply was very positive .
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.
