The Thermal Regulator Role of Urban Green Spaces: The Case of Coimbra (Portugal)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Under the context of climate change, it is very necessary to study the resilience of cities to climate change. This paper provides a reference for understanding the thermal regulation effect of urban green space and promoting the sustainable development of modern cities. However, the manuscript still contains some problems, the major weaknesses related to the logical connection of introduction, discussion, and Quality of English Language.

 Below are the main issues that should be tackled in a revision of the paper.

 1.     I strongly recommend proof-reading in English, some sentences are wrong and can be confusing.

2.     Line 9-10: “This study delves into the implications of anthropogenic climate change on diverse urban structures, aiming to enhance urban resilience.”

 I cannot find the results of the effects of climate change on urban structures.

 

3.     Introduction: The authors have not provided the limitation or research gap of current studies. I suggest more findings and discussions from the literature review.

4.     Line 103-110: This paragraph only repeated the content of the last paragraph of Introduction. It introduced the purpose of this study and should not belong to the section “Materials and method”.

5.     Line 113: “Located at a mid-latitude position (40º North) is the city of Coimbra, Portugal”. The English language is very strange. 

6.     Section: Discussion

This section should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them. You can also discuss the pipeline how your work can inform policy-making not only repeat your results in section 4. 

7.     Conclusion: Future research directions may also be mentioned. 

8.     More recent studies should be referenced in your study.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I strongly recommend proof-reading in English, some sentences are wrong and can be confusing.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Firstly, we would like to thank for the thorough and insightful review of the manuscript. The suggestions and comments have significantly enhanced the quality of our article, and we deeply appreciate the time and effort you invested in helping us refine this work. Please find below a synthesis on how we integrated each of your comments:

 

1. Proofreading in English: We have conducted a thorough proofreading of the entire manuscript to correct any grammatical errors and improve sentence structure, ensuring the clarity and coherence of the text.
2. Line 9-10 - Clarification on Climate Change Effects: We have expanded our discussion in the relevant sections to explicitly address the effects of anthropogenic climate change on diverse urban structures, thereby aligning the content more closely with the stated objectives of the study.
3. Introduction - Research Gaps: The introduction has been revised to include a clearer statement of the research gaps and limitations in current studies. This includes an enhanced literature review, providing a more comprehensive background for our research.
4. Line 103-110 - Paragraph Repetition: The content in question has been revised to avoid repetition. We have relocated the introduction of the study's purpose to an appropriate section to maintain the structural integrity of the manuscript.
5. Line 113 - Language Improvement: The sentence structure and phrasing of the specified line have been refined for better readability and to adhere to standard English language conventions.
6. Discussion Section: We have revised the discussion section to focus more on interpreting the significance of our results and their implications. The revised section now includes a discussion on how our findings can inform policy-making, moving beyond mere repetition of results.
7. Conclusion - Future Research Directions: The conclusion has been expanded to include potential directions for future research, providing a clearer path for subsequent studies in this field.
8. Inclusion of Recent Studies: We have updated our references to include more recent studies, ensuring that our article reflects the latest research and developments in the field.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

your manuscript offers valuable insights into urban green spaces and their role in regulating temperatures in the urban environment, contributing to pertinent issues in urban planning, climate adaptation, and environmental conservation.

In the manuscript conducted measurements and analyses, utilizing diverse data collection methods, including vertical temperature measurements.

However, in order to elevate this manuscript to a higher level and ensure its relevance and significance to the broader scientific community, I propose the following:

Introduction:

Clearer Research Thesis: Present the main thesis of the research right at the beginning. For example, "This paper focuses on the role of urban green spaces in regulating temperatures in urban environments, exploring how different spatial configurations affect thermal characteristics."

Better Terminology Definition: When using specific terms in the introduction, such as "urban heat islands" (UHI), make sure to precisely define them to ensure understanding by readers who may not be experts in urban climatology.

More Comprehensive Review of Previous Research: Include a concise review of relevant previous research to set the context and highlight the contribution of your paper.

Clear Statement of Research Objectives: At the end of the introduction, state the specific research objectives so that readers know what to expect from the rest of the paper.

Materials and Methods

In the "2.1. Study area" section, you can provide more information about the surface of the city of Coimbra, its climate, and historical characteristics. This will help readers better understand the research context.

In the "2.2. Research methods" section, enhance the details of the methods you used for data collection. For example, explain how temperature measurement devices were set up at different heights, how thermal data was collected, and how it was processed.

In sentences 135 and 136, it is explicitly stated which methods were employed and how they contributed to achieving the research objectives.

Clarity in device and measurement method descriptions: Describe the technical specifications of the measurement devices, resolution, data collection speed, and other technical details that are essential for understanding the precision of your measurements.

Results

Incorporate a more detailed statistical analysis of your results to provide readers with a better understanding of significant differences and variations among the tested areas. Describe the statistical methods used, including the types of tests and significance thresholds.

Comparative Analysis with Previous Research: Compare your results with those of other similar studies, particularly those conducted on urban green spaces. This will help contextualize your findings and instill greater confidence in your conclusions.

Enhanced Explanations of Graphs and Images: Provide more comprehensive descriptions and interpretations of graphs and images to clarify the key features of your results. In particular, explain how temperature changes vary throughout different parts of the day.

Improve the quality of Figures 5 and 7.

 

 

 

Discussion

 It would be beneficial to expand on the implications of the findings for urban planning and sustainability in Coimbra and similar urban areas. Discussing potential policy recommendations and practical applications would enhance the chapter.

Conclusions

Chapter 5 provides a concise summary of the key findings and their implications. The temperature differences observed between urban and green areas are highlighted, emphasizing the role of green spaces in moderating extreme temperatures. The discussion of vertical temperature profiles and the effect of tree compositions, densities, and canopy structures is a notable strength of the chapter.

Overall, Chapter 5 presents a thorough discussion of the research findings and their significance in addressing urban heat-related challenges. Expanding on the practical applications of these findings could enhance the reader's understanding of the real-world impact of the research.

 

To further improve this section, consider expanding on the broader implications of these findings for urban planning and climate resilience, providing specific recommendations for urban planners, policymakers, and researchers.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Firstly, we would like to thank for the thorough and insightful review of the manuscript. The suggestions and comments have significantly enhanced the quality of our article, and we deeply appreciate the time and effort you invested in helping us refine this work. Please find below a synthesis on how we integrated each of your comments:

 

Introduction:

1. Clearer Research Thesis: We have revised the introduction to clearly present our main thesis at the outset, emphasizing the role of urban green spaces in temperature regulation and the influence of spatial configurations.
2. Better Terminology Definition: We have ensured that terms like "urban heat islands" (UHI) are precisely defined, making the content accessible to a broader audience, including non-experts in urban climatology.
3. Comprehensive Review of Previous Research: The introduction now includes a concise yet thorough review of relevant prior research, setting a clear context for our study and highlighting its unique contributions.
4. Clear Statement of Research Objectives: We have explicitly stated the specific objectives of our research at the end of the introduction, guiding readers on what to expect in the subsequent sections.

Materials and Methods:

1. Study Area Details: Additional information on Coimbra’s surface, climate, and historical characteristics has been included, providing readers with a better understanding of the research context.
2. Enhanced Methodological Details: The "Research methods" section now contains more detailed descriptions of our data collection methods, including the setup of temperature measurement devices and data processing techniques.
3. Clarity in Device Descriptions: We have included technical specifications of the measurement devices, such as resolution and data collection speed, to clarify the precision of our measurements.

Results:

1. Detailed Statistical Analysis: A more comprehensive statistical analysis has been incorporated, detailing significant differences and variations among tested areas, with clear descriptions of the statistical methods used.
2. Comparative Analysis with Previous Research: Our results are now compared with similar studies on urban green spaces, providing context and strengthening the confidence in our conclusions.
3. Enhanced Explanations of Visual Data: We have improved the descriptions and interpretations of graphs and images, making it easier for readers to understand how temperature changes vary throughout the day.
4. Quality Improvement of Figures: Figures 5 and 7 have been enhanced in terms of quality and clarity to better convey our findings.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you very much for your interesting paper. An article that develops a very contemporary and necessary line of research to improve the way we plan our cities, integrating 3D analysis, an aspect still little addressed in scientific literature.

 

From my point of view, it seems like a good article and I only suggest some proposals and make some comments:

 

Line 70. Please define or frame the concept of urban forest, as it is very different internationally. Perhaps the FAO (2016) definition may be appropriate.

 

Line 75. Would it be possible to include more quotes on this topic and more modern ones?

 

Line 76. It would be interesting to frame the concept of European green infrastructure and detail it in Portugal, taking into account the existence of the National Ecological Structure in Portugal.

 

General. In my opinion, some comment is missing on the limitation of the study with regard to plant species. It is evident that different tree species function very differently due to their morphological characteristics, leaf density, leaf size, more analyzed (density, height, width, etc...).

 

Line 100. Please better define “hot periods”.

 

Figure 1. Review the legend.

 

Line 154. Please explain the route selection methodology.

 

Line 150. This paragraph could be linked to the paragraph on line 145.

 

Line 202. Missing punctuation mark?

Line 225. Should the species parameter be included? Or clarify the limitation of the study.

Line 260. Qualify the limitations derived from the botanical composition.

Line 306. Homogenize the name of the lime tree avenue.

Line 308. I believe that the first paragraph is a summary of the study and I consider it appropriate to eliminate or revise it. The results section should be only about results.

Line 319. This paragraph repeats some results, I suggest reviewing it.

Line 363. I think that aspects linked to plant species are concluded, but the study may not delve into it, I suggest reviewing it.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Firstly, we would like to thank for the thorough and insightful review of the manuscript. The suggestions and comments have significantly enhanced the quality of our article, and we deeply appreciate the time and effort you invested in helping us refine this work. Please find below a synthesis on how we integrated each of your comments:

 

1. Line 70 - Concept of Urban Forest: We have included the definition of urban forests as per the FAO (2016) guidelines to provide a clear and internationally recognized framework. This addition helps in setting a consistent context for our discussion on urban forests within the article.
2. Line 75 - Additional Quotes: We have incorporated more recent and relevant quotations on the topic to enrich our discussion and provide a contemporary perspective. This update offers readers a broader understanding of the subject matter.
3. Line 76 - European Green Infrastructure in Portugal: The article now frames the concept of European green infrastructure with specific reference to Portugal, acknowledging the National Ecological Structure of Portugal. This inclusion provides a more nuanced understanding of the local context within the broader European perspective.
4. General Comment on Plant Species Limitation: We have added a section discussing the limitations of our study in regards to plant species. This acknowledgment addresses the diverse functional roles of different tree species based on their morphological characteristics, leaf density, and size, contributing to a more balanced and comprehensive view of our findings.
5. Line 100 - Definition of “Hot Periods”: The term “hot periods” has been clarified to specifically refer to times of elevated temperatures, typically occurring during summer months or heatwave events. This precision enhances the clarity of our discussion on urban heat resilience.
6. Figure 1 - Legend Review: The legend of Figure 1 has been revised for greater clarity and accuracy, ensuring that it effectively supports the corresponding data and discussions in the text.
7. Line 154 - Route Selection Methodology: We have included a detailed explanation of our route selection methodology, outlining how the routes were strategically chosen to represent the diverse urban and green spaces within the study area.
8. Line 150 & 145 - Paragraph Linkage: The content of lines 150 and 145 has been seamlessly linked to provide a more coherent and flowing narrative.
9. Line 202 - Punctuation Correction: The missing punctuation mark on line 202 has been rectified.
10. Line 225 - Inclusion of Species Parameter: We have addressed the role of the species parameter in our study and elaborated on the limitations of our research in this regard.
11. Line 260 - Botanical Composition Limitations: We have qualified the limitations arising from the botanical composition in our analysis, ensuring a transparent acknowledgment of the study's scope.
12. Line 306 - Consistency in Naming: We have homogenized the naming convention for the lime tree avenue for consistency throughout the article.
13. Line 308 - Revision of the Summary Paragraph: The first paragraph has been revised to ensure it aligns with the purpose of the results section, focusing solely on the outcomes of the study.
14. Line 319 - Review of Repetitive Content: We have reviewed and revised the paragraph to eliminate repetition and reinforce the uniqueness of each section's content.
15. Line 363 - Review of Plant Species Aspects: We have revisited the sections linked to plant species, ensuring that our discussion is comprehensive yet focused within the scope of our study.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have no more comments and suggestions.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I still recommend proof-reading in English, some sentences are  confusing.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

I extend my sincere gratitude for the corrections and invaluable contributions you have submitted, significantly enhancing the quality and depth of your research work.

This enhancement holds the promise of fostering even greater advancements within our research community.

With respect,