Simulation of Potential Geographical Distribution and Migration Pattern with Climate Change of Ormosia microphylla Merr. & H. Y. Chen

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

The models developed are as good as the data entered into them. They are never perfect, but they can be useful. In addition to climate change, the spread of plants is also influenced by their potential enemies (insects and fungi). As far as I can see, these are not taken into account in the model. I think it would be useful to address this issue in the discussion. To what extent can the emergence of pathogens and insect pests change (modify) the future spread of O. microphylla?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article is written in clear language and the tables and figures are easy to read. The discussion is extensive and clear conclusions drawn.

Author Response

Comments 1: The models developed are as good as the data entered into them. They are never perfect, but they can be useful. In addition to climate change, the spread of plants is also influenced by their potential enemies (insects and fungi). As far as I can see, these are not taken into account in the model. I think it would be useful to address this issue in the discussion. To what extent can the emergence of pathogens and insect pests change (modify) the future spread of O. microphylla?

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments, which have been discussed in lines 425-428.。

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript submitted for review concerns the issue of simulation of potential geographical distribution and migration pattern with climate change of Ormosia microphylla Merr. & H. Y. Chen. This is a topical topic. Especially when you take into account the fact of climate change occurring in the world. The authors write that due to human interference and a limited natural capacity for regeneration, the wild resources of Ormosia microphylla Merr. & H. Y. Chen have progressively dwindled. The manuscript definitely lacks photos showing the characteristic morphological features of the studied species. Authors should take into account that not every reader will be familiar with this genre.

It would be good if the authors presented their assumptions in the form of a diagram. It would be more readable.

The maps included in the manuscript are too small and have too low resolution, making them completely illegible.

Figure 2 in its current form is completely unreadable. The authors should think about presenting the data in a more legible way - modify the chart.

Figure 3 and 4 in its current form are completely illegible and, moreover, they do not meet the requirements for maps. The authors need to improve them.

Author Response

Dear teacher:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions on the manuscript. According to your revision opinions, we have revised the manuscript in detail. The specific revisions are as follows:

Comments 1: The manuscript definitely lacks photos showing the characteristic morphological features of the studied species. Authors should take into account that not every reader will be familiar with this genre.

Response 1: Thanks for your suggestion, this study has added photos of the morphological characteristics of Ormosia microphylla, in line 105 of the article.

Comments 2: It would be good if the authors presented their assumptions in the form of a diagram. It would be more readable.

Response 2: This study has added an analysis process framework, which is reflected in lines 168-170.

Comments 3: The maps included in the manuscript are too small and have too low resolution, making them completely illegible.

Response 3: The pictures in the text have been modified to improve the resolution.

Comments 4: Figure 2 in its current form is completely unreadable. The authors should think about presenting the data in a more legible way - modify the chart.

Response 4: The table 'The AUC value of ten simulations ' has been added to the text, which is reflected in lines 178-184.

Comments 5: Figure 3 and 4 in its current form are completely illegible and, moreover, they do not meet the requirements for maps. The authors need to improve them.

Response 5: Figure 3 and Figure 4 have been modified. It is reflected in lines 221 and 249 in the text.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Authors took the reviewer's comments into account, but to an insufficient extent. The added photo of the species only shows the leaf, which is definitely too little. I expect photos of the entire plant (shape), characteristic features such as leaves, flowers and fruits. Fig. 4 is still difficult to read - perhaps the authors should consider moving it to supplementary materials and placing large maps there.

Author Response

Dear teacher: 

Thank you very much for your opinion, the relevant part has been modified, as follows :

Comments 1: The Authors took the reviewer's comments into account, but to an insufficient extent. The added photo of the species only shows the leaf, which is definitely too little. I expect photos of the entire plant (shape), characteristic features such as leaves, flowers and fruits. Fig. 4 is still difficult to read - perhaps the authors should consider moving it to supplementary materials and placing large maps there.

Response 1: We have added the target species of the whole plant, leaf and seed photos, reflected in line 107. Figure 4 is put into the text in order to better understand the content of the text. If the picture is put into the supplementary material, it may not be convenient to intuitively understand the full text.