Distribution of Bird Communities and Habitat Corridor Composition Shaped by Environmental Factors in Urbanized Landscapes: A Case Study in Beijing, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSee the file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
see the comments
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsTitle: Contribution of environmental factors in predicting bird distribution for habitat and ecological network planning：A case study in Beijing
The authors using the Citizen Science Data on Bird species of Beijing collected in 2019, arrived at (i) density distribution of six ecological groups following kernel density estimator, (ii) following MaxEnd Model predicted distribution pattern of 10 representative bird species from the six ecological groups and predicted the potential ecological corridors for six species of birds representing the six groups. It is an essential to compare the Urban Overall Planning with the Urban Biodiversity, so that appropriate measures could be suggested for the urban plan to go in harmony with ecological balance. However, the manuscript lacks in all aspects right from the title, objectives, methods, interpretation of results, discussion to the conclusions. Language component is the major setback in the entire manuscript. Methodology flaw also exist for example in ecological grouping wading and aquatic are classified in two different categories, which means waders are not part of the aquatic birds according to this manuscript and in reality, it is not so. Similarly, water river and water body are categorized into two different LULCs. Following are the detailed point by point comments and suggestion for the authors to revise their text, methods & analysis.
Title is not comprehensive: The paper covers a minimum of three different objectives viz. (i) Distribution of six representative ecological groups of birds (song birds, terrestrial birds, climbing birds, aquatic birds, wading birds, raptor birds) in 2019 were constructed using kernel density analysis and (ii) The predicted potential distribution and contribution of environmental impact factors for six bird species (Falco tinnunculus, Ardea alba, Aix galericulata, Dendrocopos canicapillus, Streptopelia chinensis, Turdus mandarinus) were obtained using MaxEnt model.
But the title seems like covering only the later objective, but the former objective is not represented at the title.
Abstract is lacking clarity. Based on the number of objectives, the key findings and their conservation issues and implications need to be described one by one. The abstract seems show two different objectives covered by the study, narrate the major findings of the first objective and then the second objective.
Further a set of bird species that share the same habitat are together called as bird community, which is the standard terminology, why the authors want to use the term ecological groups.
Line No. 14-15: Urban biodiversity is crucial for ecological security, balance, and fostering residents' awareness of human-nature interconnectedness.
Please modify the above as ‘Urban biodiversity is crucial for ecological security, and balance and fostering awareness on human-nature interconnectedness among the publics’
Line No. 16-19: This study examined the distribution characteristics and environmental influences on representative bird species from typical ecological groups in Beijing, analyzing critical habitat locations and forecasting potential ecological corridors in light of urban planning.
To identify critical habitats and forecast potential ecological corridors in the light of urban planning, we examined the distribution characteristics and environmental influences on the selected ecological group of bird in Beijing.
Line No. 19-21: Distribution of six representative ecological groups of birds (song birds, terrestrial birds, climbing birds, aquatic birds, wading birds, raptor birds) in 2019 were constructed using kernel density analysis.
In the above sentence what details parameters of data, and their sources were used need to be mentioned briefly.
Line No. 21-24: The predicted potential distribution and contribution of environmental impact factors for six bird species (Falco tinnunculus, Ardea alba, Aix galericulata, Dendrocopos canicapillus, Streptopelia chinensis, Turdus mandarinus) were obtained using MaxEnt model.
The above may be modified as ‘Further using MaxEnt Model we predicted the potential distribution and contribution of environmental factors for six bird species (Falco tinnunculus, Ardea alba, Aix galericulata, Dendrocopos canicapillus, Streptopelia chinensis, Turdus mandarinus)’
Line No. 25-26: Distribution density of bird groups was higher near water bodies and parks due to existing urban planning.
Since you are dealing about the density distribution of the six different bird groups, if you say which group/s found more where? You can easily infer why some groups are more in water areas, for example , aquatic birds and wading birds, while some other groups for example song birds and climbing birds are predominating the park areas. In an urban landscape, selection of some areas over others is basically the characteristic feature of the basis, say for example aquatic birds will invariably use areas of wetlands, while arboreal species mostly use areas where more vegetation cover available. Of course, urban planning provided such habitats in urban landscape. Therefore, the selection should be attributed to the natural characteristic features of the species first, and then the urban planning providing such habitat should be mentioned latter.
Introduction: In ecology there the term corridor is used under two different contexts: (i) movement / migration corridor and (ii) Habitat corridor.
A movement corridor is defined as a narrow strip of forest that connects either side viable habitats.
Since in Line No. 44-45: Authors describe about facilitating wildlife movement and connecting fragmented habitats, I hope the authors deals about the movement corridor. These, corridors are used by animal species for moving between two habitats. When it so, the Line No. 45 – 46, saying ‘This approach aims to conserve species within corridors’ is not correct, because corridor is narrow and it is only a passage route for animal species to move, which ultimately allows geneflow, but you can’t conserve the species within the movement corridor, as it a narrow strip.
Line No. 63: in the application of public data…..
In the above replace the word ‘application’ with ‘use’
Line No. 63-67: yet issues such as the lack of prominent application effectiveness still exist, utilizing and promoting existing data-sharing platforms for urban bird research to construct key species ecological corridor networks would optimize urban biodiversity conservation planning and urban green space system planning.
This is too descriptive and it could be precise as ‘yet not effective to construct ecological corridors for key species that could optimize urban green space planning besides biodiversity conservation’
Line No. 68-70: This study selected China's most comprehensive and complete citizen bird database to collect bird watching reports within the Beijing area, with the goal of observing data to study the distribution of biodiversity.
As pointed out earlier this statement is also too descriptive for example word comprehensive itself refers to completeness, when it is so, using words such as ‘most’ and ‘complete’ are not needed. Further, goal can’t be observing data. Rewrite this sentence.
Line No. 70-73: The selection was based on the background of international hot spots………… in biodiversity research.
What the authors mean by ‘The selection’, selection of What? not clear, re-write this sentence.
Line No. 73-77: The article aimed to 1) ascertain the critical habitats and distribution density of six representative species of birds; 2) research the dynamic behaviours of birds and investigate the connection between environmental conditions and bird diversity dispersion; 3) identify prospective ecological corridors and ecological sources.
Aim is different from objective.
- Aim refers to broad, overarching goals or intentions.
- Objective is a specific, measurable, and time-bound target set to achieve the aims.
- Aims provide general direction and purpose, while objectives focus on specific actions and goals.
If what you have given in above are aims of the study, what are the specific measurable objectives set up to achieve these aims. Objectives need to be clearly listed at the end of introduction.
Line 74-75: Research the dynamic behaviours of birds…. In this statement what the authors mean to say ‘dynamics behaviour of birds?
Line No. 84-86: Every theory or technique for locating corridors has pros and cons based on relevant study on corridors [12,13].
The sentence is not clear, I think the authors trying to make state that ‘Studies on corridors point out that every theory and technique in locating corridor has its own pros and cons’
Figure 108 2. Location of Beijing. The larger China boundary map placed on the left-hand side is no use, and this map replaced by the map that is on the right-hand side top and keep this map in small size, from which zoom in the Beijing part and show the same on the right-hand side on a large scale. You merge the land use map along with Figure 3.
Figure 3. 2015-2020 Bird distribution density. Please modify the title into ‘Figure 3. Spatiotemporal variation in density distribution of birds between 2015 and 2020’
The yearly density distribution maps shown individually are too small need to be enlarged slightly.
Method: Details such as on what basis or criteria, the environmental variables used were selected in this study and their sampling protocol, sampling location and sample size obtained etc need to be included into the Table 1.
There exist different diversity calculators and what this study used what type of diversity calculation for the bird diversity should be mentioned.
Table 1.Details of datasets in this study. Please mention what dataset is this?
Line No. 173-175: According to the bird species' habit characteristics, environmental data included DEM, distance to water bodies, distance to rivers, distance to railways, NDVI, land use, and night lights index.
Please cite references for the above statement. More than environmental factors listed above, other factors such as rainfall, temperature, humidity, human disturbance in case of aquatic birds, and waders physio-chemical parameter etc would also be playing a major role in density distribution of birds. Since every ecological group of birds selected is influenced a set of environmental factors, why this study just relied on only six factors for the six different ecological groups of birds.
Line No. 176: middle habitat quality, change this to moderate habitat quality.
The Result section starts with sub-title 3.1 Security pattern of bird species conservation and 3.1.1 Potential distribution of representative bird species in an ecological network. These are not the terminology used in objectives.
Line No. 214: The distribution pattern of the diversity density in Beijing in 2019.
distribution pattern of the diversity density is confusing term. Rewrite this sentence.
Figure 4: Firstly, the all the maps need to be enlarged in size and they are too small to view.
Secondly, Habitat quality category legend given in the map is different from the method section. Consistency is needed for the readers to understand them.
Thirdly, when you showing a geo-spatial map, there should be some name label of places. The administrative boundaries are shown, but their name is not labelled. I suggest the authors to replace the green colour used for low density area, with light grey, as that used in the earlier map, and include labelling the areas including administrative zones.
Figure title: Diversity density distribution patterns is not an appropriate terminology as mentioned earlier.
Figure 5. Predicted distribution of representative bird species.(a: Corvus macrorhynchos; b:Turdus mandarinus; c: Streptopelia chinensis; d: Dendrocopos canicapillus; e: Alcedo atthis; f: Aix galericulata; g: Gallinula chloropus; h: Ardea alba; i: Ardea cinerea; j: Falco tinnunculus)
Figure 6. Distribution of ecological sources and potential ecological corridor for representative bird species.(a: Turdus mandarinus; b: Streptopelia chinensis; c: Dendrocopos canicapillus; d: Aix galericulata; e: Ardea alba; f: Falco tinnunculus).
In this tile term called ‘ecological sources’ is mentioned all of a sudden. However, it is neither introduced at the introduction, as what these ecological sources, nor a part the objectives or described in the method section.
Figure 7. The proportion of area suitable for different bird habitats.
The title should be something like ‘Proportion of various quality of habitat available to the six species of birds in the study area’
Figure 8. Comparison of potential corridor area of different birds.
Are the authors talking about movement/migration corridor or habitat corridor?
Figure 9. Comparison of land composition of different bird corridors.
Land composition is not the right terminology rather it should Land Use and Landcover [LULC]
Figure 10. Comparison of contribution rates of environmental impact factors of birds.
Axis Label: Corvus is labelled as Raptor bird.
Line No. 276-277: The environmental factor with the highest contribution rate among terrestrial birds and songbirds was the nighttime light index. I only see distance to water showing the highest contribution. Much of interpretation in the text is not matching the figure.
Discussion: Discussion should be as per the objective. However, the point of discussion is completely off from the results obtained. Therefore, focus of the study has not considered in the discussion by discussing the objectives one by one.
Conclusions are inadequately backed by the findings.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageLanguage is the major setback in the manuscript.
Author Response
|
Comments 1: Title is not comprehensive: The paper covers a minimum of three different objectives viz. (i) Distribution of six representative ecological groups of birds (song birds, terrestrial birds, climbing birds, aquatic birds, wading birds, raptor birds) in 2019 were constructed using kernel density analysis and (ii) The predicted potential distribution and contribution of environmental impact factors for six bird species (Falco tinnunculus, Ardea alba, Aix galericulata, Dendrocopos canicapillus, Streptopelia chinensis, Turdus mandarinus) were obtained using MaxEnt model. But the title seems like covering only the later objective, but the former objective is not represented at the title. |
|
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have change the title as Distribution of Bird Communities and Habitat Corridor Com-position Shaped by Environmental Factors in Urbanized Landscapes. – P1, Abstract, and line2
|
|
Comments 2: Abstract is lacking clarity. Based on the number of objectives, the key findings and their conservation issues and implications need to be described one by one. The abstract seems show two different objectives covered by the study, narrate the major findings of the first objective and then the second objective. Further a set of bird species that share the same habitat are together called as bird community, which is the standard terminology, why the authors want to use the term ecological groups. |
|
Response 2: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the issue of the results nucleus according to each of the three categories of objectives to emphasize this point. And we adjust the term ecological groups to bird community.– page 1, paragraph 1, and line16-20.
|
|
Comments 3: Line No. 14-15: Urban biodiversity is crucial for ecological security, balance, and fostering residents' awareness of human-nature interconnectedness. Please modify the above as ‘Urban biodiversity is crucial for ecological security, and balance and fostering awareness on human-nature interconnectedness among the publics’ |
|
Response 3: Agree. We have, accordingly, done to emphasize this point. – page 1, paragraph 1, and line 14-15.
|
|
Comments 4: Line No. 16-19: This study examined the distribution characteristics and environmental influences on representative bird species from typical ecological groups in Beijing, analyzing critical habitat locations and forecasting potential ecological corridors in light of urban planning. To identify critical habitats and forecast potential ecological corridors in the light of urban planning, we examined the distribution characteristics and environmental influences on the selected ecological group of bird in Beijing. |
|
Response 4: Agree. We have, accordingly, done some modifications to emphasize this point. – page 1, paragraph 1, and line 16-23.
|
|
Comments 5: Line No. 19-21: Distribution of six representative ecological groups of birds (song birds, terrestrial birds, climbing birds, aquatic birds, wading birds, raptor birds) in 2019 were constructed using kernel density analysis. In the above sentence what details parameters of data, and their sources were used need to be mentioned briefly. |
|
Response 5: Agree. We have, accordingly, added details parameters of data, and their sources to emphasize this point. – page 1, paragraph1, and line 20-23.
|
|
Comments 6: Line No. 21-24: The predicted potential distribution and contribution of environmental impact factors for six bird species (Falco tinnunculus, Ardea alba, Aix galericulata, Dendrocopos canicapillus, Streptopelia chinensis, Turdus mandarinus) were obtained using MaxEnt model. The above may be modified as ‘Further using MaxEnt Model we predicted the potential distribution and contribution of environmental factors for six bird species (Falco tinnunculus, Ardea alba, Aix galericulata, Dendrocopos canicapillus, Streptopelia chinensis, Turdus mandarinus)’ |
|
Response 6: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the sentences to emphasize this point.– page 1, paragraph1, and line20-23.
|
|
Comments 7: Line No. 25-26: Distribution density of bird groups was higher near water bodies and parks due to existing urban planning. Since you are dealing about the density distribution of the six different bird groups, if you say which group/s found more where? You can easily infer why some groups are more in water areas, for example , aquatic birds and wading birds, while some other groups for example song birds and climbing birds are predominating the park areas. In an urban landscape, selection of some areas over others is basically the characteristic feature of the basis, say for example aquatic birds will invariably use areas of wetlands, while arboreal species mostly use areas where more vegetation cover available. Of course, urban planning provided such habitats in urban landscape. Therefore, the selection should be attributed to the natural characteristic features of the species first, and then the urban planning providing such habitat should be mentioned latter. |
|
Response 7: Thank you for pointing out the points. Agree. We have, accordingly, done some modifications to emphasize this point. – page 1, paragraph1, and line23-27.
|
|
Comments 8: Since in Line No. 44-45: Authors describe about facilitating wildlife movement and connecting fragmented habitats, I hope the authors deals about the movement corridor. These, corridors are used by animal species for moving between two habitats. When it so, the Line No. 45 – 46, saying ‘This approach aims to conserve species within corridors’ is not correct, because corridor is narrow and it is only a passage route for animal species to move, which ultimately allows geneflow, but you can’t conserve the species within the movement corridor, as it a narrow strip. |
|
Response 8: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have , accordingly, revised the aim to emphasize this point. And we standardize the subsequent descriptions of bird ecological corridors to habitat corridors, as we have filtered the quality and size of the habitats.– page1, paragraph2, and line46-51.
|
|
Comments 9: Line No. 63: in the application of public data….. In the above replace the word ‘application’ with ‘use’ |
|
Response 9: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have, accordingly, modified the sentences to emphasize this point.– page 2, paragraph 4, and line82.]
|
|
Comments 10: Line No. 63-67: yet issues such as the lack of prominent application effectiveness still exist, utilizing and promoting existing data-sharing platforms for urban bird research to construct key species ecological corridor networks would optimize urban biodiversity conservation planning and urban green space system planning. This is too descriptive and it could be precise as ‘yet not effective to construct ecological corridors for key species that could optimize urban green space planning besides biodiversity conservation’ |
|
Response 10: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have deletected the sentences to emphasize this point.
|
|
Comments 11: Line No. 68-70: This study selected China's most comprehensive and complete citizen bird database to collect bird watching reports within the Beijing area, with the goal of observing data to study the distribution of biodiversity. As pointed out earlier this statement is also too descriptive for example word comprehensive itself refers to completeness, when it is so, using words such as ‘most’ and ‘complete’ are not needed. Further, goal can’t be observing data. Rewrite this sentence. |
|
Response 11: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have modified the sentences to emphasize this point.– page 2, paragraph,5 and line88-89.
|
|
Comments 12: Line No. 70-73: The selection was based on the background of international hot spots………… in biodiversity research. What the authors mean by ‘The selection’, selection of What? not clear, re-write this sentence. |
|
Response 12: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added ‘the selection of representetive bird spicecs’ to emphasize this point. – page 2, paragraph5, and line89-91.
|
|
Comments 13: Line No. 73-77: The article aimed to 1) ascertain the critical habitats and distribution density of six representative species of birds; 2) research the dynamic behaviours of birds and investigate the connection between environmental conditions and bird diversity dispersion; 3) identify prospective ecological corridors and ecological sources. Aim is different from objective.
If what you have given in above are aims of the study, what are the specific measurable objectives set up to achieve these aims. Objectives need to be clearly listed at the end of introduction. |
|
Response 13: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have modified the sentences to emphasize this point. – page2-3 and line91-101.
|
|
Comments 14: Line 74-75: Research the dynamic behaviours of birds…. In this statement what the authors mean to say ‘dynamics behaviour of birds?’ |
|
Response 14: Agree. We have, accordingly, deleted the element to emphasize this point. ‘dynamics behaviour of birds?’ is not very appropriate to describe movement corroids.
|
|
Comments 15: Line No. 84-86: Every theory or technique for locating corridors has pros and cons based on relevant study on corridors [12,13]. The sentence is not clear, I think the authors trying to make state that ‘Studies on corridors point out that every theory and technique in locating corridor has its own pros and cons. |
|
Response 15: Agree. We have, accordingly, done modification to emphasize this point. – page number3-4and line120-122.
|
|
Comments 16: Figure 108 2. Location of Beijing. The larger China boundary map placed on the left-hand side is no use, and this map replaced by the map that is on the right-hand side top and keep this map in small size, from which zoom in the Beijing part and show the same on the right-hand side on a large scale. You merge the land use map along with Figure 3. |
|
Response 16: Agree. We have, accordingly, revised the Figure 2 to emphasize this point. It is renamed as Figure 1. – page3 and Figure 1.
|
|
Comments 17: Figure 3. 2015-2020 Bird distribution density. Please modify the title into ‘Figure 3. Spatiotemporal variation in density distribution of birds between 2015 and 2020’ The yearly density distribution maps shown individually are too small need to be enlarged slightly. |
|
Response 17: Agree. We have, accordingly, done the modification to emphasize this point. – page 6, Figure 3.
|
|
Comments 18: Method: Details such as on what basis or criteria, the environmental variables used were selected in this study and their sampling protocol, sampling location and sample size obtained etc need to be included into the Table 1. There exist different diversity calculators and what this study used what type of diversity calculation for the bird diversity should be mentioned. |
|
Response 18: Agree. We have, accordingly, done more details in Table 1 and more explanation of diversity calculation for the bird diversity to emphasize this point. The data was downloaded from the URLs provided in the table, and the study area was within Beijing. Except for the bird data, which had a specific quantity, the rest wereraster files or shp files. Therefore, in the text, we indicated the data formats and precision, and standardized all raster data to a resolution of 30 meters.– page5,.Table 1, page4, paragraph1, and line141-145.
|
|
Comments 19: Table 1.Details of datasets in this study. Please mention what dataset is this? |
|
Response 19: Agree. We have, accordingly, changed the name of the table to emphasize this point. The revised name is ’Details of a dataset of geographical sources and a dataset of bird records in this study.’– page 5, Table 1.
|
|
Comments 20: Line No. 173-175: According to the bird species' habit characteristics, environmental data included DEM, distance to water bodies, distance to rivers, distance to railways, NDVI, land use, and night lights index. Please cite references for the above statement. More than environmental factors listed above, other factors such as rainfall, temperature, humidity, human disturbance in case of aquatic birds, and waders physio-chemical parameter etc would also be playing a major role in density distribution of birds. Since every ecological group of birds selected is influenced a set of environmental factors, why this study just relied on only six factors for the six different ecological groups of birds. |
|
Response 20: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified some background and references to emphasize this point. –page 8, paragraph1, and line199-212..
|
|
Comments 20: Line No. 176: middle habitat quality, change this to moderate habitat quality. |
|
Response 20: Agree. We have, accordingly, done the modification to emphasize this point. – page 8, paragraph1, and line230.
|
|
Comments 21: The Result section starts with sub-title 3.1 Security pattern of bird species conservation and 3.1.1 Potential distribution of representative bird species in an ecological network. These are not the terminology used in objectives. |
|
Response 21: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have modified the sub-title to emphasize this point. 3.1 Spatiotemporal variation in density distribution of birds in Beijing 3.1.1 Spatiotemporal variation in density distribution of bird communities 3.1.2 Predicted spatiotemporal variation in density distribution of representative bird species 3.2 Analysis of the critical habitats and habitat corridors 3.2.1 The potential corridor area of different bird species 3.2.2 The availability of the critical habitats 3.2.3 The contribution of environmental factors to the prediction results of potential bird habitat corridors 3.3 Comparison of critical habitats and habitat corridors in the light of Planning – page 9-15, Page 246-381.
|
|
Comments 22: Figure 4: Firstly, the all the maps need to be enlarged in size and they are too small to view. Secondly, Habitat quality category legend given in the map is different from the method section. Consistency is needed for the readers to understand them. Thirdly, when you showing a geo-spatial map, there should be some name label of places. The administrative boundaries are shown, but their name is not labelled. I suggest the authors to replace the green colour used for low density area, with light grey, as that used in the earlier map, and include labelling the areas including administrative zones. Figure title: Diversity density distribution patterns is not an appropriate terminology as mentioned earlier. The yearly density distribution maps shown individually are too small need to be enlarged slightly. |
|
Response 22: Agree. We have, accordingly, enlarged all the maps, adjusted the legend of Habitat quality category and added some name label of places emphasize this point. Thank you so much to figure out the shortcomings of color used for low density area, with light grey and the fiure title. We all make some modifications. – page 9, Figure 4.
|
|
Comments 23: Figure 5. Predicted distribution of representative bird species.(a: Corvus macrorhynchos; b:Turdus mandarinus; c: Streptopelia chinensis; d: Dendrocopos canicapillus; e: Alcedo atthis; f: Aix galericulata; g: Gallinula chloropus; h: Ardea alba; i: Ardea cinerea; j: Falco tinnunculus) |
|
Response 23: Agree. Thank you so much to help us correct this issue. We have, accordingly, changed the title as Predicted spatiotemporal variation in density distribution of representative bird species to emphasize this point. – page 10-11, Figure 5.
|
|
Comments 24: Figure 6. Distribution of ecological sources and potential ecological corridor for representative bird species.(a: Turdus mandarinus; b: Streptopelia chinensis; c: Dendrocopos canicapillus; d: Aix galericulata; e: Ardea alba; f: Falco tinnunculus). In this tile term called ‘ecological sources’ is mentioned all of a sudden. However, it is neither introduced at the introduction, as what these ecological sources, nor a part the objectives or described in the method section. |
|
Response 24: Agree. We have, accordingly, changed ecological sources to critical habitats to emphasize this point. And unified the expression throughout the entire text. – page 12, Figure 6.
|
|
Comments 25: Figure 7. The proportion of area suitable for different bird habitats. The title should be something like ‘Proportion of various quality of habitat available to the six species of birds in the study area’ |
|
Response 25: Agree. We have, accordingly, done modifications to emphasize this point.– page 13, Figure 8..
|
|
Comments 26: Figure 8. Comparison of potential corridor area of different birds. Are the authors talking about movement/migration corridor or habitat corridor? |
|
Response 26: Thanks for your question. We are talking about habitat corridor. – page13, Figure 9.]
|
|
Comments 27: Figure 9. Comparison of land composition of different bird corridors. Land composition is not the right terminology rather it should Land Use and Landcover [LULC] |
|
Response 27: Agree. We have, accordingly, changed the sentence to emphasize this point.– page 13, Figure 9.
|
|
Comments 28: Figure 10. Comparison of contribution rates of environmental impact factors of birds. Axis Label: Corvus is labelled as Raptor bird. |
|
Response 28: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have modified the picture. – page 14, Figure 10.
|
|
Comments 29: Line No. 276-277: The environmental factor with the highest contribution rate among terrestrial birds and songbirds was the nighttime light index. I only see distance to water showing the highest contribution. Much of interpretation in the text is not matching the figure. |
|
Response 29: Agree. We apologized for the previous error in the legend, which caused the analysis in the text to be inconsistent with the figure.We have, accordingly, modified the legend and content to emphasize this point. – page13- 14 and line 346-366.
|
|
Comments 30: Discussion: Discussion should be as per the objective. However, the point of discussion is completely off from the results obtained. Therefore, focus of the study has not considered in the discussion by discussing the objectives one by one. |
|
Response 30: Agree. We have, accordingly, revised the discussion content to emphasize this point. – page number15-17 and line.383-503
|
|
Comments 31 Conclusions are inadequately backed by the findings. |
|
Response 31: Agree. We have, accordingly, revised the finds to support our conclusions to emphasize this point. – page18, paragraph1, and line505-515.
|
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe landscape of the Beijing area is characterised by a number of variables in order to identify the preferred areas for 10 bird species. Spatial analysis (GIS) and the maximum entropy method (MaxEnt) are used to identify the area's most likely to be used by birds as ecological corridors. The paper provides a proof of concept demonstrating the application of spatial analysis to the design of ecological corridors in the development plans of a large metropolis. It also illustrates the usefulness of citizen science in the design of urban plans.
The study is confirmatory and local, as it does not refute the findings of studies on ecological corridors or urban design. The conclusions were mostly expected. However, there are some logical limitations that should be addressed. For example, 'ecological sources' and 'ecological corridors' are identified, but 'ecological sinks' are not. The full analysis of ecological connectivity would consider the sources and sinks as well as the corridors connecting them. Ecological sinks are the areas where, for example, birds would disappear or not breed. In the absence of sinks, populations would grow and disperse throughout the study area, which is a logical inconsistency. They cannot increase indefinitely, so .... What are the areas in Beijing where birds would disappear? Areas where populations are likely to decline should be identified. The least that should be done is to comment on what is the expected outcome of incorporating the results of the study into the future of the populations, given that populations cannot increase indefinitely. The manuscript should state: a) what is the population size of the ten species in the Beijing area? b) how much would it increase if the study's recommendations were implemented? and c) would the increases be desirable? New problems may arise, but the paper says nothing about them. Nor does the Discussion comment on the costs of implementing the proposed methodology for reconciling urban development and biodiversity conservation. Both limitations should be addressed in the revised manuscript. At the very least, they should be discussed.
Minor comments
Lines 127-132. The number of birds has increased significantly between the years 2015 and 2020. The word "significantly" suggests a statistical value. Please add a statistical test to support your claim. Alternatively, you could change the sentence to say that the 'increase' is just a subjective judgement. Perhaps it is not the population size that has increased, but the mobility of the same birds, given that these years coincided with the confinement of the human population due to the COVID epidemic.
Line 139. Typo: change "Beijing (A flexible" by "Beijing. A flexible".
Line 143. Delete ")".
Lines 317-318. Ecological corridors and ecological sources are shown in this Figure 11. Where there are sources, there must be sinks. In the absence of ecological sinks or ecological traps, populations from ecological sources would saturate the ecosystem. Add to Figure 11 the places where birds from ecological sources are expected to disappear. Or could disappear. This would be a prediction worth testing in further work.
Lines 358-361. Question: Would it be beneficial to prioritise biodiversity in spatial planning so that it can guide habitat restoration and support sustainable urban-rural development? Answer: Of course, it would. This statement is not a conclusion, but a 'truism', which is a statement that can only be true. A truism is spottable if it holds before and after the study, since it cannot be proved to be false. Please rewrite the conclusion sentences in a style that supports the study without relying on truisms. For example, it might be possible to conclude your paper by stating the extent to which it is beneficial to prioritise biodiversity in spatial planning according to the principles of ecological civilisation. It is obvious that such prioritisation is beneficial (a truism!), but it is not at all clear how much beneficial it is. And this is the practical value of a study: quantifying the beneficial effects. And the difficulty, of course. The degree of improvement, whether expressed as a percentage or a rate or some other parameterisation, is a conclusion that may be more or less modest, but is certainly no longer obvious. See, for example, lines 253-255 and 303-305, which express quantitatively the results that could constitute the conclusions of your study.
Lines 380. Typo: a comma should be moved. Where it says "Sciences ,for", it should read "Sciences, for"
Lines 384. References. Please refer to the Editorial Guidelines for the style of references. Some examples of styles that need to be corrected:
* Journal names. Some journals are shown in capital letters, e.g. "NATURE COMMUNICATIONS" (line 454), but others are shown in lower case italics, e.g. "The Science of the Total Environment" (line 457).
* DOI codes are shown in upper case (example: line 399 "DOI:"), but also in lower case as a URL address (line 403 "https://doi.org/").
Line 460: Put spaces between words. Where it says "Areas:The Caseof", it should say "Areas: The Case of".
Author Response
|
Comments 1: The study is confirmatory and local, as it does not refute the findings of studies on ecological corridors or urban design. The conclusions were mostly expected. However, there are some logical limitations that should be addressed. For example, 'ecological sources' and 'ecological corridors' are identified, but 'ecological sinks' are not. The full analysis of ecological connectivity would consider the sources and sinks as well as the corridors connecting them. Ecological sinks are the areas where, for example, birds would disappear or not breed. In the absence of sinks, populations would grow and disperse throughout the study area, which is a logical inconsistency. They cannot increase indefinitely, so .... What are the areas in Beijing where birds would disappear? Areas where populations are likely to decline should be identified. The least that should be done is to comment on what is the expected outcome of incorporating the results of the study into the future of the populations, given that populations cannot increase indefinitely. |
|
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have figured out the palces in Beijing where birds would disappear. Such as in the predicted range of raptors, the distribution of Falco tinnunculus in Changping District appeared to decrease, with its distribution center shifting towards the core urban areas, primarily represented by Dongcheng District and Xicheng District.– page 10, paragraph 6, and line 282-284.
|
|
Comments 2: The manuscript should state: a) what is the population size of the ten species in the Beijing area? |
|
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. However, because the birds involved include resident birds, summer visitors, winter visitors, passage migrants, and vagrant visitors, which have one or more of these attributes, we use the annual bird data observed by the public as an estimate of population size.– page 6, Table2.
|
|
Comments 3: b) how much would it increase if the study's recommendations were implemented? B) |
|
Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Although our research cannot provide precise quantitative data, we propose that, on a macro level, large corridors should be established within green spaces, utilizing waterways and major roads for connectivity. Strengthening the protection of forests near farmland and wetlands can enhance the connectivity of green spaces. This is beneficial for increasing the proportion of high-quality habitats for bird communities to over 10%.– page 17, paragraph 3, and line 483-491.
|
|
Comments 4: c) would the increases be desirable? |
|
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have discussed the impact of increased bird biodiversity on the public from the perspectives of conservation and monitoring. – page 17, paragraph 3, and line 494-501.
|
|
Comments 5: New problems may arise, but the paper says nothing about them. Nor does the Discussion comment on the costs of implementing the proposed methodology for reconciling urban development and biodiversity conservation. Both limitations should be addressed in the revised manuscript. At the very least, they should be discussed. |
|
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. I/We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have increased the discussion on the threats posed by the presence of foreign bird communities to local bird species, as well as the potential threats and panic caused to the public by wildlife entering urban areas.– page 17, paragraph 3, and line483-503.
|
|
Comments 6: Lines 127-132. The number of birds has increased significantly between the years 2015 and 2020. The word "significantly" suggests a statistical value. Please add a statistical test to support your claim. Alternatively, you could change the sentence to say that the 'increase' is just a subjective judgement. Perhaps it is not the population size that has increased, but the mobility of the same birds, given that these years coincided with the confinement of the human population due to the COVID epidemic. |
|
Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added “there seems to ” to support our claim. – page 5, paragraph 1, and line150-151.]
|
|
Comments 7: Line 139. Typo: change "Beijing (A flexible" by "Beijing. A flexible". |
|
Response 7: Agree. We have, accordingly, revised "Beijing (A flexible" by "Beijing. A flexible" to emphasize this point. – page 6, paragraph1, and line162.
|
|
Comments 8: Line 143. Delete ")". |
|
Response 8: Agree. We have, accordingly, done the deletion.
|
|
Comments 9: Lines 317-318. Ecological corridors and ecological sources are shown in this Figure 11. Where there are sources, there must be sinks. In the absence of ecological sinks or ecological traps, populations from ecological sources would saturate the ecosystem. Add to Figure 11 the places where birds from ecological sources are expected to disappear. Or could disappear. This would be a prediction worth testing in further work. |
|
Response 9: Agree. We have, accordingly, modified the points showing the places where birds from ecological sources are expected to disappear to emphasize this point. – page 15, Figure 11.
|
|
Comments 10: Lines 358-361. Question: Would it be beneficial to prioritise biodiversity in spatial planning so that it can guide habitat restoration and support sustainable urban-rural development? Answer: Of course, it would. This statement is not a conclusion, but a 'truism', which is a statement that can only be true. A truism is spottable if it holds before and after the study, since it cannot be proved to be false. Please rewrite the conclusion sentences in a style that supports the study without relying on truisms. For example, it might be possible to conclude your paper by stating the extent to which it is beneficial to prioritise biodiversity in spatial planning according to the principles of ecological civilisation. It is obvious that such prioritisation is beneficial (a truism!), but it is not at all clear how much beneficial it is. And this is the practical value of a study: quantifying the beneficial effects. And the difficulty, of course. The degree of improvement, whether expressed as a percentage or a rate or some other parameterisation, is a conclusion that may be more or less modest, but is certainly no longer obvious. See, for example, lines 253-255 and 303-305, which express quantitatively the results that could constitute the conclusions of your study. |
|
Response 10: Thank you for pointing this out. Agree. We have, accordingly, revised the discussion part and added more references to emphasize this point. – page 15-16 and line384-453.
|
|
Comments 11: Lines 380. Typo: a comma should be moved. Where it says "Sciences ,for", it should read "Sciences, for" |
|
Response11: Thanks a lot but we want to make a clarification. The complete sentence is “Thanks to Professor Dong Jingjing from the School of Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University and Zhang Mengyuan, the postdoctor of School of Sciences for the Human Habitat, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences ,for their guidance and assistance during the writing of this article”. Here “Sciences ,for” belong to different parts of the sentence. – page 18 and line528.
|
|
Comments 12: Lines 384. References. Please refer to the Editorial Guidelines for the style of references. Some examples of styles that need to be corrected: * DOI codes are shown in upper case (example: line 399 "DOI:"), but also in lower case as a URL address (line 403 "https://doi.org/"). |
|
Response12: We have, accordingly, done the modification to emphasize this point. – page number, paragraph, and line.]
|
|
Comments 13: * Journal names. Some journals are shown in capital letters, e.g. "NATURE COMMUNICATIONS" (line 454), but others are shown in lower case italics, e.g. "The Science of the Total Environment" (line 457). |
|
Response13: Agree. We have, accordingly, refer to the Editorial Guidelines for the style of references.,and done the modification to emphasize this point.
|
|
Comments 14: * DOI codes are shown in upper case (example: line 399 "DOI:"), but also in lower case as a URL address (line 403 "https://doi.org/"). |
|
Response 14: Agree. We have, accordingly, done the modification to emphasize this point. We all used lower case as a URL address– Page 19-20, |
|
Comments 15: Line 460: Put spaces between words. Where it says "Areas:The Caseof", it should say "Areas: The Case of". |
|
Response 15: Agree. We have, accordingly, done the modification to emphasize this point. – page 20 and line625.]
|
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthe made modifications are sufficient
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for the review and encouragement.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsTitle: Distribution of Bird Communities and Habitat Corridor Composition Shaped by Environmental Factors in Urbanized Landscapes：A case study in Beijing，China
The authors have now modified the title and revised the text considerably as per the comments and suggestions. I appreciate the authors for the progress. However, as authors have not incorporated all my comments and suggestions appropriately and revised MS line numbers are not continuous, the manuscript requires more fine tuning to improve its clarity, consistency and quality. I have listed each one of them one by one and they have to incorporated carefully. In addition, the authors need to look for such mistakes as pointed in the list, in the entire manuscript apart from the specifically pointed out. Otherwise, they may not get corrected.
Major concerns are Figures especially maps are not up to the standard. Firstly, maps are too small in size, use of colours for various LULC not up to the International Standards. Multiple maps in each Figures needs orderly arrangement, some of the map starts with legend, chronological order of map for various years are not arranged by row or column. Name in legend and LULC element name mentioned at the title are not matching. Like how language is thoroughly edited, maps need to be thoroughly revised, as maps play major role in this study that used so many software to produce the same.
Issue about classification of ecological grouping: wading and aquatic are classified in two different categories, which means waders are not part of the aquatic birds according to this manuscript and in reality, it is not so. Similarly, river and water surface boundary are categorized into two different LULCs.
Line No. 25: were gathered in forest-covered areas near wetlands and farmland in suburban area.
In the above add coma after forest-covered areas, and make the suburban area into plural by adding ‘s’ for area.
Line No. 42: Birds, essential indicators of urban ecosystem health, have garnered global attention for their responses to urbanization.
In the above sentence, reference citation is needed.
What happened to line no 46-110? which are missing in the second page. Thus the number Response 8, is missing in the Version 2.
Line No. 157: The article aimed to 1) ascertain and predict the distribution density of six representative species of birds;
In above sentence, the term distribution density should be changed into density distribution.
Line No. 157-160: The article aimed to 1) ascertain and predict the distribution density of six representative species of birds; 2) explore the critical habitats and habitat corridors of selected bird species and the proportion of seven environmental factors’ contributions; 3) compare the critical habitats and habitat corridors with planning.
As pointed out in my comments on Version one against Line No. 73-77, which stated that: The article aimed to 1) ascertain the critical habitats and distribution density of six representative species of birds; 2) research the dynamic behaviours of birds and investigate the connection between environmental conditions and bird diversity dispersion; 3) identify prospective ecological corridors and ecological sources.
Aim is different from objective.
- Aim refers to broad, overarching goals or intentions.
- Objective is a specific, measurable, and time-bound target set to achieve the aims.
- Aims provide general direction and purpose, while objectives focus on specific actions and goals.
The authors have not differentiated the Aim from objectives and revised the version 2 accordingly, although they stated in their Response 13 that they have emphasized the suggestion given.
My suggestion regarding Figure 2. Study area map has improved partly but not completely, because the Figure 1 in the revised version still showing the Chian’s map in larger size and the Study area map Beijing, which is zoomed in from China map, is shown in smaller size, which should be shown in larger size.
The China map should be in smaller size as that of Beijing map size and should be placed either in right hand upper corner, as an insert and Beijing map should be on the left-hand side in larger size as that China map size at present. The purpose of map readers to understand about various elements according to the title of the study like urban resident, rural human-settlement / cultivation, National high-ways, high-ways, secondary road, water-holes etc.
Line No. 310: Title given for the map or any other figure must describe what are the contents of map or figure. In the current figure there are three maps, what are they and what for they are placed here should be narrated. Otherwise, they are with no use.
Figure 3, can be still be enlarged to fit into one full page and a single border given outside together for all the maps and hence the figure is appearing. The name labels are so small no one could read at present, as each map are so small. The XY map can be placed as separate figure and show what the legend for 10 different gradients of colour given and what title of this figure. It looks like how the extent of habitat quality changed over the years. Authors have put so much of time in preparing the output, but without proper title giving all the detail of the figures or appropriate size and arrangements, purpose of placing such figure is not going to solve the purpose. The authors must know that the figures and tables must be standalone must attract the readers attention.
Further when there are multiple maps within a figure, they should be placed in an orderly manner either by row or by column. For example, in the present figure, the arrangement by row, the First Row starts with legend, which should be placed at the bottom right, after that 2020 LULC map, 2015, Then the Second Row there is XY chart, 2016, 2017, Third row with 2018, 2019 & 2020. I could not make out whether they are arranged by column or in row. The arrangement is completely messy at present.
When preparing a map, the colour used for various elements should be representative of natural colour of each element to a large extent, for example the standard colour used for water body is dark blue colour, the figure 6 uses black or dark-green colour for water surface and river. Secondly the legend naming should be very proper conveying the meaning. In Figure 6, please see the legend, they are neither complete nor proper. Water surface boundary, it should be labelled as standing water-body or lake or pond, because some of the study subject (aquatic birds) rely on such habitat, that it should be labelled and coloured appropriately. Colour used River, administrative, regional boundaries can’t be distinguished, as they are more or less represented with similar colours. Similarly, there is legend only with word ‘administrative’, which is incomplete should be administrative boundary, secondly what administration it is ? Is it a District or Taluk or State or Forest administrative boundary?
Further the figure 6 title says Distribution of critical habitats and potential habitat corridors, but I only see the critical habitat alone shown no idea about where the potential habitat corridors, but the legend says ecological corridor, which is mismatching with the title.
Figure 7. The quantity of potential corridor area of different bird species. This is incomplete and is not stand alone, like how title is given for figure 8 or 9.
Figure 9, shows legend shrub land, shrub forest. Method section should describe every LELC, so that What difference between these two could be distinguished.
Line No. 903: To investigate the preferences and environmental requirements of representative bird species for habitat corridors, the analysis (Figure 10) identified that, among the seven selected factors, the most significant environmental factors for raptor birds, wading birds, aquatic birds, and climbing birds was the distance to water bodies.
The authors talk about preference in habitat corridor, which is nether described how it was identified in the method section nor seem aware about what it means. One can determine or find out habitat preference of a species, only when you have data on availability of various habitats in the environment for the species concerned and their utilization by the species. As per the preference definition the habitat proportionately used more than its availability is called preferred habitat. In this what is the proportionate is means for example in total 100 km2 area is the territory of a tigress, in which with grasslands constitute only 20% (20 km2) and shrublands constitute rest 80% (80 km2). In these two habitats, the tigress , uses grasslands for 30% of the total study period and shrubland for 70% of the total of the study period. The grassland is the preferred habitat of tigress, because its proportion in the tigress territory is 0.2 or by percentage 20%, but the it was used by the tigress for 30% of the study period. Whereas the shrubland is not the preferred habitat because its available in the tigress territory is 80%, but used by the tigress only for 60% its time. The latter one (shrubland) is principal habitat and grasslands is preferred. Much of the researcher are thinking the most used is the preferred habitat without knowing what is proportion of its availability in the environment. Simple example is that we eat more chapatti than a sweet. Although the sweet is our preferred, we eat more chapatti, simply because of sweet is available lesser than Chapatti and thus chapatti is our principal diet. Therefore, one has to know available in the environment or used time, based on which only preference can be calculated.
Results: Improved largely.
Discussion part is now improved and it should still be ordered as per the objectives.
Conclusions: In addition to conclusion, the manuscript should also come out with recommendations to Urban planning or Overall Planning, as this study aim to promote the Urban development in harmony with nature, considering the existing “Beijing Urban Overall Planning (2016–2035)”. What are positives and negatives of the existing policy of Beijing Overall Urban Planning and how the negatives need to be alleviated or measures to alleviate the negative of “Beijing Urban Overall Planning (2016–2035)”
Author Response
Thank you for your dedication and guidance, we have benefited greatly.
Please see the pdf for the changes in the attachment since it contains pictures and attachments.
Sincere thanks for your guidance.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
