Spatial–Temporal Multivariate Correlation Analysis of Ecosystem Services and Ecological Risk in Areas of Overlapped Cropland and Coal Resources in the Eastern Plains, China
, Huping Hou 3, Zanxu Chen 1 and Qinyu Wu 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a valuable study, especially for the risk control and ecological governance of resource-based cultivated land has certain guiding significance. But there are some unclear places I hope the author can be clear.
1. This research topic is relatively common. What are the innovation points? And how it differs from other regions?
Data sources in 2 and 2.3 are macroscopic data, while some data in this study are at the county level. Are all the data available at the source of the presentation?
3. What is the classification basis of Table 4 and Table 6? Why these four dimensions?
4. The part of research methods is not very clear and needs to be supplemented completely.
5, the conclusion part is too few, the analysis is very shallow. Further clarification is required.
6. Some references are unnecessary, such as 32 and 57, which are far from your research topic.
Author Response
We are very grateful for your comments on the manuscript. According to your advice, we tried our best to amend the relevant part and make some manuscript changes. All of your questions were answered below. Here we list the changes.
We appreciate for reviewers’ warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Spatial-temporal multivariate correlation analysis of ecosystem services and ecological risk in areas overlapped by cropland and coal resources in the eastern plains, China 4
This is a well-designed paper, very clear and concise. However, the main comment I have is that the authors do not explain the implications of the calculations much. There were many calculations of different indices, but it’s hard to follow as to why it’s calculated, how they related to each other, and what the policy implications are. The paper would benefit from more explanations on the calculations. In addition, there are some grammatical errors and it would be good if authors sought for a proof reader’s edits before publishing. Please find my detailed comments below.
Abstract:
o Change “overlapped” to “overlapping “areas of cropland and coal resources play a fundamental role.
o “The multivariate 14 correlation analysis of ecosystem services value (ESV) and ecological risk (ER) on the composite 15 functional site are essential for improving environmental quality and coordinated development. ” please elaborate more.. what do the authors mean? How is the correlation analysis essential? What does composite functional site mean? How does this relate to the overlapping areas of cropland and coal resources? These areas are composite functional sites, correct?
o Please Explain the 1), 2) and 3) results to the readers a bit more, ER decreasing – what does it mean?
- Introduction
o First paragraph: explain a bit more about how mining creates conflict
o Second paragraph: please explain a bit more about how ESV is calculated as you have for the case of ER. Also explain how they relate to each other
o Third paragraph: what does coal mining lead to structural/functions of the original ecosystems, please give some examples. What does it mean to have spatial heterogeneity to the ecosystem? Here we need clearer explanations as to how mining affects the ecosystem, and what that implies for changing ESV and ER measures. Also need to explain a bit more to the readers, what does it mean to have high-water levels?
- Section 2
o Great Figure. Please enlarge the legend so readers can see better.
o “The impact of underground resource mining and landscape pattern evolution”, do you mean “and associated changes in land patterns on the…”?
o Section 2.2.1. please add the implications of why you’re calculating the ESV, ER. I can see from the figure it’s to help with multivariate correlational analysis, but at this point it’s still not clear to the reader what the multivariate correlational analysis is for.
o The original ESV and calculation methods should be outlined first, before going into the modification method
o Please insert a table of data on the variables for socio-economic data. I’m not clear on the economic value of land, which is important for calculating the ecosystem service value coefficient.
- Results
o Section 3.1. why was there an increase in ESV in 2015, and then decrease in 2020?
o Table 6, delete the Chinese character year
- Conclusions
o “From 2010 to 2020, the ESV in Peixian decreased from the east to the west of 405 the study area ” – Not sure what this means?
Author Response
We are very grateful for your comments on the manuscript. According to your advice, we tried our best to amend the relevant part and make some manuscript changes. All of your questions were answered below. Here we list the changes.
We appreciate the reviewers’ warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will be approved.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
The article concerns the assessment of environmental risk analysis related to coal mining. Looking at the environment in terms of ecosystem services significantly extends the assessment of anthropopressure. The proposed method allows for the assessment of such risk in the research area, but how universal is it? Chapter 4.3 also accurately summarized my comments, it is worth emphasizing a reliable and critical approach to the subject.
With best regards
Author Response
We are very grateful for your comments and suggestions for the manuscript.
The study in this paper has shortcomings, which only partially reflect the actual situation of a complex ecosystem. Therefore, in the follow-up study, we will develop a more scientific and reasonable ESV evaluation model close to the existing regional characteristics. At the same time, we will further verify whether the revised index system is universal in other regions in subsequent studies.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
