A Comparative Study on the Identification Methods of Urban–Rural Integration Zones from the Perspective of Symbiosis Theory and Urban Expansion Theory
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study is very important and well-written.
The difficulty of this study is how to distinguish integrated urban-rural areas from fully urbanized regions and fully rural regions. This paper needs to be revised before publication as follows:
1. The relationship between symbiosis theory and urban expansion theory and the method of delineating urban-rural integrated areas is unclear, and how do these theories help to identify urban-rural integrated areas?
2. The concept of symbiosis emphasizes not only spatial concepts but also social connotations, how does it apply to the identification of urban-rural integrated regions? Whether these theories effectively guide the identification of areas needs further consideration.
3. The importance of comparing methods for identifying integrated urban-rural areas needs to be further explained.
Author Response
Responses to reviewers (original comments by reviewers are in blue color)
Reviewer # 1:
1.Comment: The relationship between symbiosis theory and urban expansion theory and the method of delimiting urban-rural integrated areas is unclear, and how do these theories help to identify urban-rural integrated areas?
1.Reply:
Thank you for your comment. First of all, I would like to answer your question about what is the relationship between the theory of symbiosis, the theory of urban expansion, and the methods of delimiting urban-rural integration areas?
The delimitation of urban-rural integration areas aims to guide decision-making related to land use planning, infrastructure construction, resource management, and service provision in integrated urban-rural regions. Therefore, it is necessary to deepen our understanding of urban-rural integration areas through theoretical exploration. The concept of symbiosis is highly complex and dynamic in the context of urban-rural integration spaces, aiding researchers in recognizing the interdependence and interactions between urban and rural areas within a region. The theory of urban expansion focuses on the actual growth and spatial patterns of urban areas, examining the processes and factors driving urbanization, including population growth, economic development, and infrastructure expansion. It helps identify the encroachment of urban development on rural areas, leading to urban-rural integration. The adoption of the G-statistics-based identification method for urban-rural integration areas reflects the principles of symbiosis by discerning mutual benefits, interdependence, and distinct spatial relationships between urban and rural areas. Furthermore, it aligns with the principles of urban expansion theory by identifying potential land use changes caused by spatial patterns, peri-urban areas, and the expansion of urban areas into rural areas. Evaluation indicators, including land use dynamics, vegetation cover dynamics, and nighttime light fluctuations, are established accordingly. Similarly, the identification method based on the urban-rural gradient model depicts the intricate coexistence of urban and rural characteristics in the integration areas, reflecting the potential symbiotic relationship. This method not only captures patterns of urban spatial expansion but also identifies areas where urban areas extend into rural areas, thus reflecting the principles of urban expansion theory. In this regard, evaluation indicators are established. （This paragraph has been included in the revised version on page 3, L 139-150.）
Secondly, I would like to answer your question about how the theory of symbiosis and urban sprawl can be used to facilitate the process of urban-rural integration?
The integration of urban and rural spaces serves as a transitional zone where symbiotic relationships exhibit a high level of complexity and dynamism. Guided by symbiotic theory, the delimitation of urban-rural integration zones is based on understanding the interdependencies between urban and rural ecosystems. Indicators that reflect the symbiotic nature of urban-rural spaces, such as the comprehensive land use index, Shannon's diversity index, patch density, and maximum patch index, have been selected for this purpose. These indicators enable the identification of the intricate relationships and spatial landscape patterns of land patches within the urban-rural integration zones, thereby highlighting their heightened ecological sensitivity. Based on these findings, protective strategies can be devised to conserve agricultural land, preserve natural habitats, and establish green infrastructure networks that connect urban and rural areas. The theory of urban expansion guides the demarcation of urban-rural integration zones through the analysis of spatial expansion patterns associated with urban-rural integration using an urban gradient model. Indicators that capture urban expansion, such as proximity to the city center, density of points of interest (POI), distance to train stations, and subway stations, have been carefully selected. The urban-rural integration zones identified based on these indicators align with the prevailing urban development patterns and directions, exhibiting relatively sound public services, infrastructure, and untapped development potentials. （This paragraph has been included in the revised version on P6，L264-L282）
2.Comment: The concept of symbiosis emphasizes not only spatial concepts but also social connotations, how does it apply to the identification of urban-rural integrated regions? Whether these theories effectively guide the identification of areas needs further consideration？
Reply:
The concept of symbiosis emphasizes both spatial concepts and social connotations, making it applicable to identifying integrated urban-rural regions from multiple perspectives. Symbiotic theory posits that urban and rural areas are socially interconnected and interdependent systems, transcending spatial considerations and emphasizing the social relationships and interactions between urban and rural communities. The social essence of symbiosis underscores the significance of fostering social cohesion, equity, and inclusivity within integrated urban-rural regions. When delimiting these regions, it is essential to consider the social structures and connections between urban and rural populations, including access to education, healthcare, social services, and recreational facilities. Analyzing the social networks, cultural exchanges, and community collaborations that extend beyond urban and rural boundaries is of utmost importance. Understanding the flow of resources and their impact on urban and rural communities is vital. Such understanding aids in identifying regions characterized by reciprocal resource interdependence and shared interests, thereby signifying the integrated areas. （The simplified modifications in this paragraph have been included in the revised version on page 5, L 219-227.）
Due to limitations in data sources, this paper lacks further exploration of the symbiotic theory. In terms of selecting social indicators for urban-rural integration spaces, we have only been able to utilize metrics such as POI density, GDP data, and Baidu heatmaps. However, we recognize the need for more human-centered data sources, which we intend to explore in our future investigations. To effectively identify urban-rural integration zones, a more dynamic and multi-dimensional perspective is required to understand these spaces from various angles. This approach aims to provide recommendations for the implementation of policies concerning urban-rural integration. （The simplified modifications in this paragraph have been included in the revised version on P25，L813-L827）
3. Comment: The importance of comparing methods for identifying integrated urban-rural areas needs to be further explained.
3. Reply:
Thank you for your comment. Comparing methods for identifying areas of urban-rural integration is of great importance for several reasons. Firstly, urban-rural integration is a multidimensional concept that encompasses social, economic, environmental, and spatial aspects. Comparing various methods helps ensure a comprehensive evaluation of these different dimensions. Some methods may focus more on spatial patterns, while others may emphasize socio-economic indicators or environmental factors. Through method comparison, it becomes possible to integrate multiple dimensions and gain a holistic understanding of urban-rural integration. Different methods may require distinct data inputs and have varying data requirements. Comparing methods enables an assessment of data availability and accessibility. Some approaches may rely on extensive datasets that are difficult to obtain, while others may utilize data from more easily accessible sources. By comparing methods, researchers can utilize existing data infrastructure or identify data gaps that need to be addressed. Through such comparisons, new methods and frameworks can be developed, expanding the toolbox for identifying and comprehending urban-rural integration. This iterative process aids in refining and improving the methods used for identifying areas of urban-rural integration over time. （The simplified modifications in this paragraph have been included in the revised version on P2，L80-L93）
Different regions and contexts possess unique characteristics and dynamics that influence the integration of urban and rural areas. By comparing various methods, adjustments and customization can be made to suit specific regional backgrounds. Researchers and policymakers can choose or develop approaches that best capture the subtle differences and complexities of urban-rural integration in a particular area by considering a range of methods. Such assessments provide valuable information for evidence-based decision-making and help refine and strengthen strategies for urban-rural integration. The selection of methods to identify urban-rural integration areas holds policy significance and impacts the decision-making process. Different methods may highlight distinct aspects or domains of integration, which can influence resource prioritization, targeted interventions, and policy formulation. （The simplified modifications in this paragraph have been included in the revised version on P24，L778-L789）
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments on “A Comparative Study on the Identification Methods of Urban-Rural Integration Zones: A Symbiosis and Urban Expansion Theory Perspective”
This research is an interesting attempt to identify the boundary of the urban-rural area.
This study provides readers with detailed insights through the G-statistic and GM models. However, the research questions and results were not explained thoroughly, and the “Introduction and Literature Review” discourses are not accurate enough and well-organized. What’s worse, there are many basic mistakes in academic English writing, especially in the format of references; the authors should know that these basic mistakes make this manuscript seem to be written hurriedly and very unprofessional.
Besides, there are only 7 English references in this study and 36 Chinese references. The Journal of Land (SSCI) is international; the authors should understand that the readers may not understand Chinese. If the readers are interested in the paper you cited, how do the readers understand 36 Chinese articles? If the authors thought Chinese journal papers had more meaning, why not submit this manuscript to the Chinese Journal? It is very disrespectful to English readers.
Although the authors’ outstanding efforts in their data and model, I feel sorry to reject this manuscript.
My suggestions,
Firstly, the authors must re-write the “Introduction”. In addition, I have a suggestion: how to write the introduction ? The introduction is a window, and should be put to the readers and reviewers very briefly and forcibly. It maybe include: (1) what is known (our understand of the agricultural ecological efficiency)? (2) What is unknown ( what’s the gap of the agricultural ecological efficiency we want to fill) ? (3) How and why should we fill the gap (you rationale and purpose/hypothesis )? (3) Methods, what did you do (including innovative methods )? (4) Results: what results did you get? (5) Discussion: how do the results fill the gap? (6) Conclusion: what does this mean for us going forward? Besides, this part can not be too long.
Secondly, it is necessary to expound on the results and explain why the authors chose these two methods, what research questions were deduced from the literature review on Urban-Rural Integration Zones (then the readers can understand further the theoretical construction and model derivation), and the gaps in the methods, the comparative methods(not two methods) in identifying the boundary of the urban-rural area.
Thirdly, this manuscript must need another English editing service (if hurry, the author can consider MDPI Language Editing Services-Rapid). Many parts need to be clarified (highlighted in yellow) with too many mistakes and format mistakes (highlighted in green).
Fourthly, These basic English academic writing problems make it hard to believe whether the author's paper is credible. On the one hand, it may be the first time for the author to write an English paper, and he needs to learn the basic academic requirements of English; It may also be that the authors should have carefully revised before submitting the manuscript. For whatever reason, this is unacceptable. And it is disrespectful to journal editors and reviewers.
Detailed comments:
Line 62-75, 110-135
l “Li Shifeng and Bai Renpu [8] established......They developed a model ...... “
l “Zhou Hao et al[6]. used the comprehensive dynamic degree of land ..... “
l “Zhang Zhigang et al[9].... constructed a model of combined features of brightness and fluctuation in brightness....of the main urban area of Chongqing. “
l “Huang Qi et al[10] developed an attribute....“
l “Liu Xingnan et al[11] proposed a method of identifying urban fringe areas based on multi-source data and.... “
l “Liang Chen and Zeng Jian[12] ......“
l “Yuan Chunqing[15] was the first to apply...”
l “. Gao Jinlong et al.[22] ...”
l “. Zhang Yaoyu et al.[23] analyzed ....”
Line 79,84, （1）and （2）， the authors should use (1) and (2).
Line 89-95, what is the cited resource?
Line 102, “Additionally, the existing research exhibits a coarse granularity and inadequate accuracy.” This academic writing discourse is wrong, the authors should clear the “research niche” and “research question”.
Line 104-108, what is the cited resource?
Based on the above problems, I'm sorry for reject this manuscript.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Please see the comments.
Author Response
Responses to reviewers (original comments by reviewers are in blue color)
1.Comment: Firstly, the author needs to rewrite the "Introduction" section. Additionally, there is a suggestion on how to write the introduction. The introduction serves as a gateway and should effectively and concisely introduce the readers and reviewers. It may include: (1) What is known (our understanding of agricultural ecological efficiency)? (2) What is unknown (the extent of the agricultural ecological efficiency gap we aim to bridge)? (3) How and why should we bridge this gap (your reasoning and objectives/hypotheses)? (3) Methods, what have been done (including innovative approaches)? (4) Results, what has been achieved? (5) Discussion: How do the results address the gap? (6) Conclusion: What implications does this hold for our future development? Furthermore, this section should not be excessively lengthy.
1.Reply:
We greatly appreciate your valuable suggestions. After careful consideration and taking into account your recommended modifications, we have made several changes to the paper. Firstly, we have added an introduction that addresses the shortcomings of previous studies and highlights the importance and necessity of our work. Additionally, we have made necessary additions and deletions, including the inclusion of two theories that provide guidance for identifying urban-rural integration zones, and the removal of research reviews that are not closely related to our paper. Furthermore, we have provided detailed explanations of the research objectives and emphasized the significance of comparing methods for identifying urban-rural integration zones. The introduction section has been revised accordingly, and you can find the highlighted red changes in the modified version we have submitted. （This paragraph has been included in the revised version on P1，L36-L183）
2.Comment: Secondly, it is essential to provide a comprehensive explanation of the results and discuss the author's rationale for selecting these two methods. It is also important to highlight the research questions derived from the literature review on urban-rural integration zones (This enables readers to gain further insight into the theoretical framework and model derivation). Furthermore, it is crucial to address the methodological gaps and compare various approaches for identifying urban-rural boundaries (Instead of restricting the discussion to only two methods).
2.Reply:
We have expanded the literature review section in our research paper to enhance readers' comprehension of our study. Furthermore, we have addressed the limitations of previous research and analyzed the gaps and differences in the methods used to identify urban-rural integration zones. These modifications enable readers to better understand the theoretical framework and model derivation. The specific content has been highlighted in red in the modified version we have submitted. （This paragraph has been included in the revised version on P2，L44-L94）
3.Comment: Thirdly, it is necessary to seek another English editing service for this manuscript. If time is limited, the author may consider using MDPI's Rapid Language Editing service. Several sections require clarification, which are highlighted in yellow, and there are numerous errors and formatting issues, which are highlighted in green.
3.Reply:
We have already engaged native English professionals to edit and revise the entire document. The modifications can be found in the revised manuscript that we have submitted.
4. Comment: Fourthly, these fundamental issues in English academic writing raise doubts about the reliability of the author's paper. It is possible that the author lacks experience in writing English papers and needs to become familiar with the basic academic requirements of the language. Alternatively, it could be a result of inadequate editing and revision before submitting the manuscript. Regardless of the reasons, such deficiencies are unacceptable and demonstrate a lack of respect towards journal editors and reviewers.
4. Reply:
We would like to express our sincere gratitude for providing us with your valuable suggestions. We deeply regret the occurrence of such issues and have promptly taken corrective measures. We have edited and revised the entire manuscript, and you can find the evidence of our modifications in the submitted revised version.
5. Comment: It is important to note that this study includes only 7 English references and 36 Chinese references. The journal "Land" (SSCI) has a global readership, and authors should be aware that not all readers may be able to understand Chinese. Readers who are interested in the referenced articles may encounter difficulties in comprehending the content of the 36 Chinese papers. If the author believes that Chinese journal papers are more relevant, it would be more appropriate to submit this manuscript to a Chinese journal. This shows a lack of respect towards English readers.
5 Reply:
Regarding the concern you raised about the excessive number of Chinese references in our paper, we have conducted a thorough review and acknowledged our oversight. Some Chinese references cited in the manuscript can be accessed through the Web of Science, and we have made the necessary revisions to the reference formatting. Furthermore, we have diligently searched for suitable English alternatives for the remaining Chinese references using various methods and techniques. This was done to ensure that interested readers can have a more comprehensive understanding of the methods employed in the paper. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused. (The modifications to the references can be found in the revised version, pages 32, L 1019-1102.)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The subject matter is highly relevant and engaging for the scientific community. The article is thought-provoking and provides a clear, comprehensive research topic overview.
What sets this work apart is its focus on testing and developing the scientific basis for identifying urban-rural integration zones accurately. This is crucial for promoting sustainable development and rural revitalization.
The abstract and keywords provide an accurate summary of the content and objectives of the study. The research is methodologically sound and successful, with a clear and concise paper structure.
The graphical material complements the text, and the literature review is pertinent and supports the chosen subject.
I commend the authors on their well-prepared work and recommend this paper for publication in its current form.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Responses to reviewers (original comments by reviewers are in blue color)
Comment: Minor edits are necessary for the translation.
Reply:
We express our gratitude for your valuable suggestions. We have invited professional native English speakers to edit and revise the entire document. You will find the evidence of our modifications in the revised manuscript that we have submitte
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Check the attached report.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.docx
Author Response
Responses to reviewers (original comments by reviewers are in blue color)
1. Comment: P4 L87-89 This has been repeatedly stated before.
P4 L197
P15, 16 check page Formatting.
1. Reply:
Upon careful consideration, it has been observed that there is repetition in the language used in P4 L87-89. The repeated portion has been removed. Additionally, the formatting of pages 15 and 16 has been modified to conform to the style guidelines of the Land journal. （The revisions have been incorporated into the updated version.）
2. Comment: 2.1 Research Ideas: This section is considered Research Methodology not Ideas, It can be summarized and rewritten under the heading (Research Methodology), including the framework diagram.
P15, 16 check page Formatting.
2. Reply:
We greatly appreciate your suggestions. After careful consideration, we have decided to integrate the research ideas into the study framework and merge the two subsections into a single one. （The revisions have been incorporated into the updated version.）
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments on “A Comparative Study on the Identification Methods of Urban-Rural Integration Zones: A Symbiosis and Urban Expansion Theory Perspective”
This research is interesting but not professional because of many basic mistakes in academic English writing, especially in the format of references.
For example,
Part one in Version 1, these mistakes also existed. This is unacceptable and makes the reviewer confused.
l “Li Shifeng and Bai Renpu ...... “ , Please RE-EDIT it as “Li and Bai”
l “Zhou Hao et al. used the comprehensive dynamic degree of land ..... “
l “Zhang Zhigang et al..... “
l “Huang Qi et al....“
l “Liu Xingnan et al.... “
l “Liang Chen and Zeng Jian ......“
l “Yuan Chunqing was the first to apply...”
l “. Gao Jinlong et al. ...”
l “. Zhang Yaoyu et al.] analyzed ....”
Part two, the references in Line 31-32.
There are 3 styles of format of references, Please RE-EDIT them, the consistency is the most fundamental, this problem is also unacceptable.
(1) APA
Pagliacci, F. Measuring EU urban-rural continuum through fuzzy logic. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie. 2017, 108(2), 157-174.
Masuda, JR.; Garvin, T. Whose heartland？The politics of place in a rural-urban interface. Journal of Rural Studies. 2008, 24(2), 112-123.
Millward, H.; J, Spinney. Time use, travel behavior, and their rural-urban continuum: Results from the Halifax STAR project. Journal of Transport Geography. 2011, 19(1), 51-58.
(2) MLA
Surindar, Paracer.; Vernon, Ahmadjian. Symbiosis: An introduction to biological association. University Press of New England. 1986.
(3) Please learn to how to write Chinese references in English.
Li, Shifeng. A method for defining the attributes of geographical characteristics of large urban fringe areas. Economic Geography. 2006, (3), 478-481, 486. (in Chinese)
Zhang, Zhigang.; Zhang, Anming.; Guo, Huanhuan. Spatial recognition of the urban-rural fringe based on DMSP/OLS nighttime light data: A case study of the main urban areas of Chongqing. Geography and Geo-Information Science. 2016, 32(6),
Huang, Qi.; Wang, Hongzhi.; Gu Jiang, et al. The determination of urban-rural ecotones from the perspective of urban and rural landscape complexity. Economic Geography. 2019, 39(10), 71-77.
Secondly, this manuscript must need another English editing service (not the authors, if have been edited, these above problems would not appear (as marked in the attachment). These basic English academic writing problems and mistakes make it hard to believe whether the authors' paper is credible.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
See the comments.
Author Response
Responses to reviewers (original comments by reviewers are in blue color)
Reviewer # 2:
1. Comment: There are 3 styles of the format of references, Please RE-EDIT them, the consistency is the most fundamental, and this problem is also unacceptable.
1. Reply: We have meticulously adhered to the formatting requirements of the land journal by standardizing the format of the references. Furthermore, we have diligently adjusted the format of the manuscript to align with the specific formatting guidelines outlined by the land journal. The revised manuscript incorporates clear indications of the revisions made, which can be observed through the revision marks provided.
2. Comment: Secondly, this manuscript must need another English editing service (not the authors, if have been edited, these above problems would not appear (as marked in the attachment). These basic English academic writing problems and mistakes make it hard to believe whether the authors' paper is credible.
2. Reply: Native English speakers in the relevant field were invited to perform a thorough language check and revision. You can see our revision marks in the revised manuscript.
3. Comment: The problem of insufficient review of symbiosis theory studies in the manuscript.
3. Reply: We have conducted an extensive review of the existing research on symbiosis theory and have examined its practical applications in depth. The primary objective of introducing symbiosis theory in this paper is to enhance our understanding of the symbiotic relationship between urban and rural integration spaces. To facilitate research on identifying urban-rural integration regions, the application of symbiosis theory primarily involves the careful selection of indicators capable of reflecting the symbiotic nature of these regions. However, due to data availability constraints, this study falls short in terms of comprehensively selecting indicators that encompass the entirety of symbiosis theory. Consequently, future research endeavors should delve further into symbiosis theory and undertake the exploration and experimentation of indicators that more effectively capture the spatial symbiosis within urban-rural integration. These avenues of inquiry will form the basis for our ongoing research.
Symbiosis is a widely observed phenomenon that entails mutually beneficial interactions. occurring across various levels of life systems. In the context of integrated urban-rural spaces, symbiotic development occurs within economic, social, and ecological systems as rural and urban communities collaborate and leverage each other's resources and services. The concept of "symbiosis" was initially introduced by De Bary, a German biologist, in 1897, and it encompasses the notions of symbiotic units, symbiotic patterns, and symbiotic environments . Scholars from diverse disciplines have expanded the exploration of symbiotic theory, investigating symbiotic relationships between different elements, the transformation of rural residential areas , the identification of urban-rural regional systems, urban-rural coordination, and social development .Mutually beneficial symbiotic patterns can be categorized into three main types: mutualistic symbiosis, symbiotic communism, and parasitic symbiosis. The symbiotic relationship within the context of urban-rural integration spaces is characterized by its complexity. Scholars employing symbiotic theory to analyze relationships among spatial elements often introduce indicators such as symbiotic degree or symbiotic nature to examine the extent and nature of symbiotic relationships among different elements .Symbiosis serves as a fundamental principle for achieving sustainability and prosperity in human society, urban-rural development, and other life systems. In the context of urban-rural integration spaces, cities provide rural areas with robust infrastructure and public services, while rural areas offer cities high-quality natural environments and ecological resources. By applying symbiotic theory to analyze the symbiotic relationship within urban-rural integration regions, researchers can select indicators that reflect the interdependent relationship between urban and rural spaces to effectively identify urban-rural integration areas （This paragraph has been included in the revised version on P3, L113-127）.
4. Comment: Delete Appendix A and Figure 7.
4. Reply: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have thoroughly deliberated on your input and have made the decision to remove Appendix A as per your recommendation. Nonetheless, Figure 7 serves a crucial purpose in our study by illustrating the divergence resulting from the identification of the urban-rural integration zone through two distinct methods. Through extensive field research, we have acquired profound insights into the disparities arising from these approaches, providing readers with a more perceptible grasp of the dissimilarity. In conclusion, we have opted to retain Figure 7 as an integral component of our study.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
