Study on the Spatial Distribution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Famous Historical and Cultural Towns or Villages in Hubei Province, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Although the topic is interesting, the international literature consulted is very scarce. The authors should have references that contextualise the problem in regions other than China. It is a frequently studied topic. Even in the important local references to consult, there is a paper in the journal Land "Analysis on the Evolution of Rural Settlement Pattern and Its Influencing Factors in China from 1995 to 2015" by Jieyong Wang and Yu Zhang, and the authors do not cite it.
In my opinion, the subject analysed should have a key reference in the scientific literature, the work of Sevenat and Antrop. I give you the reference:
Settlement models, land use and visibility in rural landscapes: Two case studies in Greece. Marjanne Sevenant and Marc Antrop. Publicada por: Landscape and Urban Planning Volume 80, Issue 4, 20 May 2007, Pages 362-374
Figure 4 depicts a map with the counties of the province, which is necessary, but its label is very confusing and in some cases illegible. The authors could analyse other representation alternatives: dividing the province into several sectors, increasing the scale. Or create a numerical identification label with a corresponding legend or table (matrix).
The authors use a number of analysis tools that incorporate the GIS platform, I believe that as the analysis is so well supported by them, the citation of authors who focus on these applied statistics is necessary. For example:
Ebdon, David. Statistics in Geography. Blackwell, 1985.
Mitchell, Andy. The Esri Guide to GIS Analysis, Volume 2. Esri Press, 2005.
The altitudinal distribution of towns and villages is very interesting, but I consider that it should not be included under this heading of the results, as it does not play a role in the nearest neighbour index. It surely explains your result. If so, it should be specified in the methodology.
The area of influence or buffer analysis requires explaining two things: 1. What is the difference in river grade? Why are the distance criteria used in the buffer area?
Figure 7. The representation of the map from a semiological point of view is more legible using a single tone colour ramp. Although the higher density is clearly manifested, the lower densities are blurred. Class reduction is an option that would improve the readability of the map.
The methodology must express the different variables involved in the correlations analysed, demographics, urbanisation, traffic, etc.
It is best to create a table, matrix or diagram to help the reader understand the process.
How do you explain the eco-environmental conditions index?
Section 4.1. on the discussion, at least the first part, would have been very good in the introduction. The reader, who is not familiar with the analysed space, understands the work as it progresses, and almost with the map of the relationship between topography and settlements we arrive at the conclusion that it now addresses. The description of the geo-historical space at the beginning was fundamental. Appreciate it.
The discussion section is overly broad. It could be divided into other sections, introduction, results... The key to discussion in a scientific journal is:
What are the strengths and weaknesses of your study?
How to adjust (or not) the results with other published tests?
Where does the research stand now? Are the hypotheses tested, modified or abandoned?
Author Response
Thank you for the helpful feedback. The comments not only helped us with the improvement of our manuscript, but gave some neat ideas for our future studies. We have studied the comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript accordingly. We hope that the corrections will meet with approval. The revised portion is marked in red in the revised manuscript. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attachment is point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The comments are in black, the additional content is in red, and the responses are in blue.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors
I have carefully read your manuscript entitled Study on the Spatial Distribution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Famous Historical and Cultural Towns and Villages in Hubei Province, China and found it a solid academic work.
However, with regard to the last observation, I believe that the manuscript would significantly improve its overall quality if results were presented in a broader context. In the abstract, you declare providing suggestions for the conservation and development of the vernacular heritage in Hubei Province. Unfortunately, you do not deliver on that promise. Hence, the limits of applicability and universality of the method proposed - or the results obtained - remain uknown.
I would also suggest some minor revisions as follow:
- Terms like "'five levels and three types' of territorial spatial planning [in China]" (lines 57-58), "second ladder" and "third ladder" (line 348), "one belt and two clusters with multiple scattered points" (line 512) require explanation and/or reference to help foreign readers in navigating through the subject.
- In the section dedicated to the literature review, in particular, in the lines 75-76 ("After the 1960s, Western countries began to carry out large-scale research on rural settlements"), you give the impression that the studies on vernacular architecture and rural settlements are something relatively recent. It is true that they accelerated in the second par of the 20th century, but they started in Europe and North America back in the late 19th century. Consider revising.
- The terms "nuclear density" and "nuclear density distribution" are misleading. Consider revising.
- Except for the section 4.5 (lines 499-506), the discussion is more the continuation of the presentation of the research results. It would be interesting to know how these results can influence planning processes or how they fit within the bigger picture (be it preservation of cultural heritage, climate change mitigation or risk management). Please be reminded that discussion is a mandatory section in MDPI journals.
- We don't need GIS to know that the spatial distribution of historical settlements is influenced by topography, geomorphology, river systems, culture, and migration flows. We also know what the patterns of their overlapping with modern development are. The question is how to mitigate vulnerability resulting from these multi-layered dynamics. Consider focusing on that in the discussion. The first attempt made in the Conclusions (in particular lines 535-548) is very promising.
- There are some minor spelling mistakes, in particular double spaces. Please, check the manuscript again.
I hope you will find the comments above helpful in providing the final version of your paper.
Author Response
Thank you for the helpful feedback. The comments not only helped us with the improvement of our manuscript, but gave some neat ideas for our future studies. We have studied the comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript accordingly. We hope that the corrections will meet with approval. The revised portion is marked in red in the revised manuscript. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attachment is point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The comments are in black, the additional content is in red, and the responses are in blue.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
1.In abstract section, author should include the quantitative results.
2.Author should write the full form of GIS, GPS, GDP.
3.Author should include the map-Scale in Figure-3.
4.The author needs to describe the parameter of equation 3 on page 3.
5.Author should also include the methodology framework graphically for this study for better understanding the flow of research work.
6. The significance of the research methodology (* Data Analysis and Interpretation Methods) employed in this work should be discussed by the author.
.7The accuracy of the data analysis techniques employed in this study should be discussed by the author.
8.The NDVI may be included by the author since vegetation cover is another important element affecting where the villages are located.
9.Author may include The Lorenz curve for the cumulative percentage of traditional villages. The curve reflects the balance of the spatial distribution of traditional villages.
For NDVI-Vegetation Cover and Lorenz Curve, the following resource can be helpful:
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4627
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-3-W6-535-2019
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12068/pdf?version=1663947454
http://indusedu.org/pdfs/IJREISS/IJREISS_1422_29371.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for the helpful feedback. The comments not only helped us with the improvement of our manuscript, but gave some neat ideas for our future studies. We have studied the comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript accordingly. We hope that the corrections will meet with approval. The revised portion is marked in red in the revised manuscript. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attachment is point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The comments are in black, the additional content is in red, and the responses are in blue.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Plik w załączniku
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for the helpful feedback. The comments not only helped us with the improvement of our manuscript, but gave some neat ideas for our future studies. We have studied the comments carefully and tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript accordingly. We hope that the corrections will meet with approval. The revised portion is marked in red in the revised manuscript. Please feel free to contact us with any questions and we are looking forward to your consideration. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attachment is point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. The comments are in black, the additional content is in red, and the responses are in blue.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The revised work substantially improves on the original. I am particularly grateful for the emphasis on spatial analysis and mapping. International references are very important as they allow us researchers, who are unfamiliar with the nature of local problems, to reference them and rethink possible similarities or divergences in our research environments. I value very positively the methodological framework, it helps to understand the research process.
I have expressed all of the above remarks in order to improve the great work carried out, but they required such an effort. Congratulations to the team
Best regards
Reviewer 4 Report
Improvement of the article on a satisfactory level
