The Current Distribution of Carex alatauensis in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau Estimated by MaxEnt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is fine, but it needs some English editing.

Author Response

Point 1: The article is fine, but it needs some English editing.

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for the reviewer's comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Current distribution of the Carex alatauensis in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau estimated by MaxEnt” (Manuscript ID: agronomy-2133457). We apologize for the language problems in the original manuscript. We have sent the paper to MDPI for edited English language. The paper should read a lot better, and hopefully pass the language test.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
Manuscript ID: agronomy-2133457

Title: Current distribution of the Carex alatauensis in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau estimated by MaxEnt

Authors: Yunfei Xing, Jianjun Shi, Kejia De, Xiaoli Wang, Wei Wang, Yuan Ma,Hairong Zhang, Miao- hua He and Qingqing Liu

 

The manuscript provides a significant contribution to our knowledge about the behaviour of Carex alatauensis in the alpine meadow vegetation. The main aim was to modeling the current distribution and predicting suitable habitats of threatened Carex species.

The aims, sampling procedure, methods of data analysis are clearly stated and introduced. The statistical analyses are appropriate. The results and facts are presented clearly and sufficiently fully and are separated from interpretations. The authors know well the literature of the subject, and fairly discuss the correspondence of results.

I would appreciate a schematic draw or photograph about the studied species and the investigatid vegetation.

 

 

Further remarks:

The exact author name and year must be given when the species is first mentioned. Carex alatauensis S.R.Zhang 2015.

Abbreviations can be used for further mentions, but a dot must be placed after the genus name. C. alatauensis

see:

Turland, N. J., Wiersema, J. H., Barrie, F. R., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., Herendeen, P. S., Knapp, S., Kusber, W.-H., Li, D.-Z., Marhold, K., May, T. W., McNeill, J., Monro, A. M., Prado, J., Price, M. J. & Smith, G. F. (eds.) 2018: International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress Shenzhen, China, July 2017. Regnum Vegetabile 159. Glashütten: Koeltz Botanical Books. DOI https://doi.org/10.12705/Code.2018

 

I recommend entering new keywords, because the current ones can all be found in the title. This way the new, changed keyword will help others find the article.

In the section Introduction in line 40: „Cyperaceae genus Carex” that is not correct, because the Cyperaceae is a Family, Carex is a Genus.

Also in the introduction in line 60-65 it gets mixed up the presentation of the species and the model. I recommend better dividing the parts with different content.

In the section Results in line 129: „There are 91 geographical distribution coordinate data” but formerly in the section Materials and Methods in line 92: was „90 distribuiton points”. Please correct it.

In the section Results in 3.3 Variables’ Response to Suitability:

there are many repetitions, which can also be seen in Figure 4. It is unnecessary to describe them in the text. In the same way, Table 3. is unnecessary, because it is included in the text.

In the section Discussion in line 227: „ArcGIS10.4.1 software was used” this information belongs to the section Materials and Methods.

 

I feel missing from the discussion a possible solution, how to increase the true range of the species? How could overuse and overgrazing be reduced?

 

Minor mistakes:

In the abstract in line 19: „was0.833” missing space

In the section Materials and Methods in line 81: „Valley.Precipitation” missing space

In the section Materials and Methods: „Carex alatauensis Distribution Data”

instead of „2.2 Carex Alatauensis Distribution Data”

In the section Results in line 140: „The top five” instead of „The top 5”

In the section Results in line 146: „The top five” instead of „The top 5”

 

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

 

Point 1: The exact author name and year must be given when the species is first mentioned. Carex alatauensis S.R.Zhang 2015.

 

Abbreviations can be used for further mentions, but a dot must be placed after the genus name. C. alatauensis

 

see:

 

Turland, N. J., Wiersema, J. H., Barrie, F. R., Greuter, W., Hawksworth, D. L., Herendeen, P. S., Knapp, S., Kusber, W.-H., Li, D.-Z., Marhold, K., May, T. W., McNeill, J., Monro, A. M., Prado, J., Price, M. J. & Smith, G. F. (eds.) 2018: International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress Shenzhen, China, July 2017. Regnum Vegetabile 159. Glashütten: Koeltz Botanical Books. DOI https://doi.org/10.12705/Code.2018

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for the reviewer's comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Current distribution of the Carex alatauensis in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau estimated by MaxEnt” (Manuscript ID: agronomy-2133457). We had changed the vocabulary as "Carex alatauensis S.R.Zhang 2015" when the species is first mentioned. "C. alatauensis" can be used for further mentions throughout the text.

 

Point 2: I recommend entering new keywords, because the current ones can all be found in the title. This way the new, changed keyword will help others find the article.

 

Response 2: We are grateful for the suggestion. We have entered "climate variable" and "habitat distribution" as  new keywords in the article. (Please see lines 28 on page 1).

 

Point 3: In the section Introduction in line 40: „Cyperaceae genus Carex” that is not correct, because the Cyperaceae is a Family, Carex is a Genus.

 

Response 3: We had changed the "Cyperaceae genus Carex" to "Carex genus" (Please see lines 41 on page 1).

 

Point 4: Also in the introduction in line 60-65 it gets mixed up the presentation of the species and the model.  I recommend better dividing the parts with different content.

 

Response 4: We had summarized this part again and divided it into different contents.

 

 

Point 5: In the section Results in line 129: „There are 91 geographical distribution coordinate data” but formerly in the section Materials and Methods in line 92: was „90 distribuiton points”.  Please correct it.

 

Response 5: We had changed the "91" to "90"(Please see lines 130 on page 3).

 

Point 6: In the section Results in 3.3 Variables’ Response to Suitability:

there are many repetitions, which can also be seen in Figure 4.  It is unnecessary to describe them in the text.  In the same way, Table 3.  is unnecessary, because it is included in the text.

 

Response 6: Related repetitions had been deleted.

 

Point 7: In the section Discussion in line 227: „ArcGIS10.4.1 software was used” this information belongs to the section Materials and Methods.

 

Response 7: “ArcGIS10.4.1 software was used” had been deleted.

 

Point 8: In the abstract in line 19: „was0.833” missing space.

 

Response 8: Add a space at "was0.833"( Please see lines 19 on page 1)

 

Point 9: In the section Materials and Methods in line 81: „Valley. Precipitation” missing space

 

Response 9: Add a space at " Valley. Precipitation "( Please see lines 83 on page 2)

 

Point 10: In the section Materials and Methods in line 81: „Valley. Precipitation” missing space

 

Response 10: We had changed the " Carex Alatauensis Distribution Data" to " Carex alatauensis Distribution Data"(Please see lines 89 on page 2).

 

Point 11: In the section Results in line 140: „The top five” instead of „The top 5”. In the section Results in line 146: „The top five” instead of „The top 5”

 

Response 11: We had changed the " The top 5" to " The top five "(Please see lines 142 and 148).

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is very interesting although the methodology is not original.

I think it is necessary to better explain what the habitat of the species is. Although climatic factors explain the distribution of vegetation in general well, the type of soil is also good. In this work I have not seen that the soil variable is taken into account, at least in a first approximation. Therefore section 2.3 should be called climatic data instead of environmental data.

Author Response

Point 1: I think it is necessary to better explain what the habitat of the species is. Although climatic factors explain the distribution of vegetation in general well, the type of soil is also good. In this work I have not seen that the soil variable is taken into account, at least in a first approximation. Therefore section 2.3 should be called climatic data instead of environmental data.

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for the reviewer's comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Current distribution of the Carex alatauensis in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau estimated by MaxEnt” (Manuscript ID: agronomy-2133457). We are grateful for the suggestion. The habitat of species means the spatial range within which a species occurs in the environment. We had changed the "environmental data" into "climatic data" in part 2.3. In the follow-up study, we will take the soil type into account.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx