Spatiotemporal Differentiation of Land Surface Thermal Landscape in Yangtze River Delta Region, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attachment. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript under review “Temporal and spatial differentiation land surface thermal landscape in Yangtze River Delta region”, presents a mesoscale research on the temporal and spatial changes of the thermal landscape environment in the development history of an economically important region of China with the highest level of urbanization.  As urbanization deteriorates the urban thermal climate, which in term affects the quality of life and the health of citizens, the research can help identifying the environmental issues and can be used for the formulation of measures that can promote the improvement of the urban environment of the cities in the region, in terms of sustainability. The topic is interesting, well structured, therefore, the manuscript is worth publishing after some minor revision proposed below.

Authors should:

1. improve the English language and especially the use of punctuation marks (e.g., L20, L49, L66 etc.), the use of correct grammar (present and past tenses) (e.g., section 3.1.2) and remove or explain words or text left from previous comments(?) or titles of subsections (?) (e.g., L366, L438, L483, L497 etc.),
2. use a more academic syntax used in the literature to present the previous research done on the field they study (e.g., Introduction),
3. analyze the abbreviations not already done (e.g., L32, L125, L147 etc.),
4. add references for the software packages they used (e.g., L147, L155) and briefly describe them.
5. enrich and improve uncompleted legends (e.g., Figure 8. AI), as legends of figures should contain a brief but complete explanation of what the figure shows,
6. incorporate in the text of Section 5 some of ‘the large number of previous studies with which they compared their results (L537)’ and discuss the comparisons made with their conclusions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

It needs to improve based on the new suggestions and comments. Please see the attachments.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

The English highly needs revisions.