Land-Use Transfer and Its Ecological Effects in Rapidly Urbanizing Areas: A Case Study of Nanjing, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComment 1:
The summary section is informative, but some of it could be streamlined to allow the reader to understand the main findings more quickly. It is recommended that the detailed description of the methodological model be reduced and the key findings and recommendations be stated directly.
Comment 2:
In the introduction section, a discussion of the importance of ecological quality research and the shortcomings of existing research could be added to highlight the unique contribution of this research in the current academic and policy context.
Comment 3:
There are several references to graphs and charts in the text, especially the transfer matrix of land use and the spatial variation of ecological indices. It is recommended that a short explanation be added to the figure notes of each graph to help readers better understand the data and the results of the analyses.
Comment 4:
The data pre-processing and processing steps in the Methods section are more complex, but detailed process descriptions are missing for readers. Descriptions of some key steps could be added, especially for the water body mask processing and the land type classification method.
Comment 5:
There is a high level of repetition in the article for some concepts, such as the detailed description of the LUCI and RSEI models. These sections could be simplified to make the article more compact.
Comment 6:
Although the land use data and RSEI data in the article are sampled for specific years, it is recommended that further explanation on data consistency and synchronisation be provided to enhance data reliability as there may be time differences between the two.
Comment 7:
In the discussion section, further elaboration can be made on how the findings of the study can be specifically applied to urban planning practices, especially on how the specific recommendations for land use policies can be implemented in different regions.
Comment 8:
In the section on analysis of the graphs, an exploration of the linkages between the different graphs could be added, for example how land use change directly affects regional changes in the ecological quality graphs.
Comment 9:
The section on limitations could discuss more explicitly the limitations of the 30 metre resolution, in particular the lack of fine-grained classification of urban green spaces. It is recommended to add directions for improvement for future research.
Comment 10:
In some of the technical descriptions, the language is more academic and not easy to understand.
supplementary：
Taking Nanjing City as the research object, this manuscript analyzes the impact mechanism of land transfer on eco-environmental quality by using remote sensing data. The related conclusions are of significant methodological and practical implications. However, some details of the manuscript need to be improved before it is accepted.
1) Title: the title is “Impact Mechanism of Land Transfer on Eco-Environmental Quality...”, but the author just used regression method to test the relationship between the land transfer and eco-environmental quality, which in my opinion can't be called a mechanism but an effect. Suggest the author to change mechanism to effect.
2) Line19-30 “Over the past two decades, the urbanization rate in most regions of China has surged from less than 40% to nearly 80%.” , Is this statement supported by relevant literature?
3) line222-223, why are the Gi of unutilized land, grassland, water, forest land, agricultural land and construction land corresponding to 0, 1, 2, 2, 3 and 4 respectively?
4) The conclusion section of the paper lacks a discussion of the theoretical and practical contributions of this paper. It is recommended that the authors simplify the conclusion and add a description of the theoretical and practical implications.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe quality of English writing is generally sufficient to meet the requirements for publication in academic journals.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you to the reviewer for your attentive comments and suggestions during your busy schedule. The authors has carefully revised the comments and suggestions for the article. The response to the review report is as follows:
Comment 1:
The summary section is informative, but some of it could be streamlined to allow the reader to understand the main findings more quickly. It is recommended that the detailed description of the methodological model be reduced and the key findings and recommendations be stated directly.
Response 1: Thank you for your comments. In the summary section, the author has reduced the detailed description of the methodological model . The amendments have been marked in red.
Comment 2:
In the introduction section, a discussion of the importance of ecological quality research and the shortcomings of existing research could be added to highlight the unique contribution of this research in the current academic and policy context.
Response 2: In the introduction section, discussion of the importance of ecological quality research and the shortcomings of existing researches have been enriched. The modified part has been marked in red.
Comment 3:
There are several references to graphs and charts in the text, especially the transfer matrix of land use and the spatial variation of ecological indices. It is recommended that a short explanation be added to the figure notes of each graph to help readers better understand the data and the results of the analyses.
Response 3:A brief description has been added to the land transfer matrix and other charts, and the modified part has been marked in red.
Comment 4:
The data pre-processing and processing steps in the Methods section are more complex, but detailed process descriptions are missing for readers. Descriptions of some key steps could be added, especially for the water body mask processing and the land type classification method.
Response 4 :The method description of "water mask" and "land reclassification" has been added in the research method part, and the content of the added part has been marked in red.
Comment 5:
There is a high level of repetition in the article for some concepts, such as the detailed description of the LUCI and RSEI models. These sections could be simplified to make the article more compact.
Response 5: The detailed description of Luci and rsei models has been simplified, the detailed formula has been deleted, and relevant references have been quoted instead.
Comment 6:
Although the land use data and RSEI data in the article are sampled for specific years, it is recommended that further explanation on data consistency and synchronisation be provided to enhance data reliability as there may be time differences between the two.
Response 6: The land use classification data used in this study are collected from April to September, and the satellite data for RSEI are also collected from April to September, which can maintain the consistency of data collection time.
Comment 7:
In the discussion section, further elaboration can be made on how the findings of the study can be specifically applied to urban planning practices, especially on how the specific recommendations for land use policies can be implemented in different regions.
Response 7: In the discussion and conclusion sections, specific suggestions have been put forward on the practical value of the research results and the land use policies for different land types.
Comment 8:
In the section on analysis of the graphs, an exploration of the linkages between the different graphs could be added, for example how land use change directly affects regional changes in the ecological quality graphs.
Response 8: In Figure 5, the comparison diagram of land use change and rsei change in the same period has been added.
Comment 9:
The section on limitations could discuss more explicitly the limitations of the 30 metre resolution, in particular the lack of fine-grained classification of urban green spaces. It is recommended to add directions for improvement for future research.
Response 9 : Discussions on the fine-grained classification of urban green spaces content have been added and marked in red.
Comment 10:
In some of the technical descriptions, the language is more academic and not easy to understand.
Response 10 : The technical description has been optimized. The modified part has been marked in red
Supplementary：
Taking Nanjing City as the research object, this manuscript analyzes the impact mechanism of land transfer on eco-environmental quality by using remote sensing data. The related conclusions are of significant methodological and practical implications. However, some details of the manuscript need to be improved before it is accepted.
1) Title: the title is “Impact Mechanism of Land Transfer on Eco-Environmental Quality...”, but the author just used regression method to test the relationship between the land transfer and eco-environmental quality, which in my opinion can't be called a mechanism but an effect. Suggest the author to change mechanism to effect.
Response 1: the title has been changed to ”Land use Transfer and Its Ecological Effects in Rapidly Urbanizing Areas: A Case Study of Nanjing, China”
2) Line19-30 “Over the past two decades, the urbanization rate in most regions of China has surged from less than 40% to nearly 80%.” , Is this statement supported by relevant literature?
Response 2: In this part, the reference is added: national data. Official website of the National Bureau of Statistics: https://data.stats.gov.cn/easyquery.htm?cn=C01, China's urbanization rate was 40.53% in 2003 and 66.16% in 2023. The urbanization rate of Nanjing is 87.20% in 2023.
3) line222-223, why are the Gi of unutilized land, grassland, water, forest land, agricultural land and construction land corresponding to 0, 1, 2, 2, 3 and 4 respectively?
Response 3: GI represents the degree of development of various types of land (0-4). Among them, unused land has the lowest degree of development, with a value of 0, and construction land has the highest degree of development, with a value of 4. The value of GI is referred to reference [39]
4) The conclusion section of the paper lacks a discussion of the theoretical and practical contributions of this paper. It is recommended that the authors simplify the conclusion and add a description of the theoretical and practical implications.
Response 4: In the conclusion section, the conclusion has been simplified and the description of the theoretical and practical significance of this paper has been added.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript discusses the impact and mechanism of land transfer on ecological environment under the background of rapid urbanization, which takes Nanjing, China as an example, is of great significance for environmental sustainable development. This manuscript discusses the issues in detail by using several indicators and models, and draws some useful conclusions, which have an important guiding role for the environmental sustainable development of Nanjing, China. However, this paper can be further improved from the following aspects.
1. It is suggested to add a model or method term to the keywords, such as “Land Expansion Intensity model”.
2. The introduction part mentions some gaps in the current research and some contributions in this manuscript, but the contributions are not outstanding on the whole. It is suggested to use a paragraph to summarize the contribution in this manuscript, and what gaps have been filled in this manuscript compared with previous literature.
3. It is suggested that existing literature can be introduced in more detail in the introduction. Through the summary of previous studies, the gaps in current studies are proposed, which need to be further studied.
4. It is recommended that the last paragraph of the introduction explain the following paper arrangement.
5. In section 2.1 Area Studied, it is recommended to explain the source of the base map.
6. It is suggested to add a list of the specific names of variables before Indicators in Table 2, and add a column to the last column to explain the purpose of building these indicators. Or draw a flow chart in the second section to illustrate the purpose of the measurement of each indicator.
7. This manuscript takes Nanjing, China as an example. Would this study be of reference significance to the development of other regions and countries? It is suggested to compare the research conclusions of different regions with the research conclusions of this manuscript in the discussion section to find out whether there are similarities and differences in the research conclusions, and to further analyze and discuss the results.
8. Pay attention to the format of the references, such as:
(1) The names of journals referenced in References 6 and 23 are all capitalized;
(2) References37 have only one web address;
(3) References 56 to China should not be italicized.
It is recommended that references be checked according to the journal format.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you to the reviewer for your attentive comments and suggestions during your busy schedule. The authors has carefully revised the comments and suggestions for the article. The response to the review report is as follows:
This manuscript discusses the impact and mechanism of land transfer on ecological environment under the background of rapid urbanization, which takes Nanjing, China as an example, is of great significance for environmental sustainable development. This manuscript discusses the issues in detail by using several indicators and models, and draws some useful conclusions, which have an important guiding role for the environmental sustainable development of Nanjing, China. However, this paper can be further improved from the following aspects.
- It is suggested to add a model or method term to the keywords, such as “Land Expansion Intensity model”.
Response 1: Thank you for your comments. "Land expansion intensity model" has been added to the keywords
- The introduction part mentions some gaps in the current research and some contributions in this manuscript, but the contributions are not outstanding on the whole. It is suggested to use a paragraph to summarize the contribution in this manuscript, and what gaps have been filled in this manuscript compared with previous literature.
Response 2: The value and contribution of this article have been added to the introduction, discussion and conclusion, and the revised part has been marked in red.
- It is suggested that existing literature can be introduced in more detail in the introduction. Through the summary of previous studies, the gaps in current studies are proposed, which need to be further studied.
Response 3: In the introduction, the literature review has been optimized. The revised part has been marked in red.
- It is recommended that the last paragraph of the introduction explain the following paper arrangement.
Response 4: Relevant explanations have been added at corresponding positions.
- In section 2.1 Area Studied, it is recommended to explain the source of the base map.
Response 5: The source of the base map of the study area has been added below figure 1.
- It is suggested to add a list of the specific names of variables before Indicators in Table 2, and add a column to the last column to explain the purpose of building these indicators. Or draw a flow chart in the second section to illustrate the purpose of the measurement of each indicator.
Response 6: According to the suggestions of other reviewers, table 2 was deleted and replaced by reference to relevant literature. However, the purpose and significance of the indicators have been explained in the text.
- This manuscript takes Nanjing, China as an example. Would this study be of reference significance to the development of other regions and countries? It is suggested to compare the research conclusions of different regions with the research conclusions of this manuscript in the discussion section to find out whether there are similarities and differences in the research conclusions, and to further analyze and discuss the results.
Response 7: Nanjing is an important city in China's coastal rapid urbanizing areas. It is representative to study the transfer of land use and the ecological quality effects in the same period. At the same time, the transfer of land in rapid urbanizing areas has common characteristics. Relevant references also show that although there are differences in details in different regions, the overall conclusion is similar, which shows that the research on real-time monitoring of land use transfer and ecological quality change has popularization value.
- Pay attention to the format of the references, such as:
(1) The names of journals referenced in References 6 and 23 are all capitalized;
Response: It has been modified according to the format required by the Journal.
(2) References37 have only one web address;
Response: It is non-remote sensing data acquisition address. The above contents have been supplemented.
(3) References 56 to China should not be italicized.
Response: Correction completed.
It is recommended that references be checked according to the journal format.
Response: The format of all references has been checked.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors, most of the paper needs to be corrected in a technical sense. It is necessary to refine the abstract and explain the applied methodology, as well as the goal of the research, which should also be mentioned in the conclusion.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you to the reviewer for your attentive comments and suggestions during your busy schedule. The authors has carefully revised the comments and suggestions for the article. The response to the review report is as follows:
Comment 1: The abstract need to be refined.
Response 1: Thank you for your comments. The abstract has been optimized, and the modified parts have been marked in purple and red.
Comment 2: Reference 29 is already cited.
Response 2: Although reference 29 and the previous reference 25 have the same first author, they are not the same article.
Comment 3: The references should be cited in the same way.
Response 3: Data source references [36],[37],[39] have been added.
Comment 4: the applied methodology and all explanations related to it, should be defined as a new chapter 3 (Methodology).
Response 4: This section has been changed to Chapter 4. Methodology.
Comment 5: The text and way of writing must be unified, take care of that part because the paper done like this looks very messy.
Response 5: The text format of this section have been kept the same as the other sections. The modified parts have been marked in purple.
Comment 6: The space should be placed between the text and the table explanation, It looks confused.
Response 6: The format has been modified.
Comment 7: Size of the font is smaller than in other text and should be bigger, this is headline.
Response 7: The font and size of 4.2 has been the same as other parts.
Thanks again for your comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
