the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 23 Oct 2023
Determination of appropriate land use/cover pattern based on the hydroclimatic regime to support regional ecological management in the agro-pastoral ecotone of northwest China
Abstract. The agro-pastoral ecotone of northwest China (APENC) has been experiencing large-scale land use/cover change (LUCC) since 1999 as vegetation restoration projects were implemented. Negative environmental effects of excessive re-vegetation have emerged. However, it remains unclear what the optimal mixture of land use/cover in vegetation restoration is to maintain a sustainable ecohydrological environment in the APENC. In this study, we investigate the different scenarios associated with vegetation restoration in the APENC to examine the hydroclimatic impacts of vegetation restoration and identify the proper land use/cover pattern based on hydroclimatic thresholds (cooling surface and higher water conservation) using the Community Land Model version 5.0 (CLM5.0). Results show that the two main types of LUCC in the study region from 2000 to 2015 were the conversion of bare land to grasslands (BL to GRS) and croplands to grasslands (CL to GRS). The BL to GRS decreased the annual mean temperature by -0.17 ℃, while CL to GRS increased the annual mean temperature by 0.96 ℃; ET changes were 53.32 and -184.42 mm yr-1, respectively, leading to an annual spatially averaged land surface temperature (LST) by a cooling range of -0.06 ± 0.15 ℃ and evapotranspiration (ET) increased by a range of 9.70 ± 19.04 mm yr-1 in the study region. The correlation coefficients between biogeophysical characteristics and hydroclimatic change indicated surface albedo was the most sensitive surface characteristic in influencing LST and ET in summer and winter for BL to GRS and CL to GRS, while the LAI + SAI also presented the most significant correlation for CL to GRS throughout the year. Additionally, analysis of change in land use/cover pattern from 2000 to 2015 found that some grids experienced drying and warming as re-vegetation projects due to the offsetting effects of two types of LUCC. Our findings suggest the percentage of grasslands, bare land and croplands in the APENC for 2035 approximately is 60 %, 23 % and 11 %, respectively, which will mitigate the drying and warming surface environment in the semi-arid region. The findings provide important information to support long-term regional sustainable development in the APENC and similar regions.
Competing interests: The contact author has declared that neither of the authors has any competing interests.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.- Preprint
(2396 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2287', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Nov 2023
APENC is a fragile region in eco-environment. Water is an important fundmental factor affecting the ecological environment in this region. On this base, land use is another factor that affects the ecological environment. From the aspects of hydroclimatic regime and regional ecological management, the paper studied the appropriate land use/cover pattern, which is of great significance to the ecological restoration of this area. The following comments are for your reference.
- The effect of the accuracy of the adopted data on the conclusions should be discussed. Fro example, accuracy of land use data is 0.1°.
- Many sentences are very long. It is recommended to shorten them. For example line 45 and line 55.
- in line 85. In the form of references.
- The study area in this paper is not the whole of APENC. The specific location of the study area in the APENC should be introduced.
- The contents of Table 1 can be directly elaborated in paper (delete table 1)
- Significance test can be added in Table 5 and Table 6.
- in line 241. November is missing.
- The conclusion can take the form of paragraphs and should be condensed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yuzuo Zhu, 05 Feb 2024
We would like to thank you for your constructive and thoughtful comments. We have implemented all of your suggestions which have led to a much improved and complete manuscript. In the following sections, the issues raised by you are addressed in the order.
1. The effect of the accuracy of the adopted data on the conclusions should be discussed. For example, accuracy of land use data is 0.1°.
Response: The land use dataset was produced in previous teamwork (Du et al,). 500 samples were selected to evaluate land use data with field investigation and high-resolution images. The evaluation results show that the overall accuracy of the final classification and KAPPA coefficient are both >0.8, which meets the accuracy requirements. The precision of the land use dataset was trustworthy. This expression is kept consistent in the paper.
The China meteorological forcing dataset and MODIS LST have been widely used including in the study area of previous work (Wang et al, 2020; Li, 2022). Other datasets like GLASS have been evaluated in the papers that produce the data. The uncertainty of soil properties is in the discussion section.
Du, T., Jiao, J., Duan, H., He, H., XUE, X., and Xie, Y.: Study of conversion between land use/landcover classification system of Chinese Academy of Science and IGBP classification system: In the northwest argo-pastoral zone Journal of Lanzhou University: Natural Science (in Chinese), 56, 91-95, https://doi.org/10.13885/j.issn.0455-2059.20120.01.011, 2020
Wang, X., Zhang, B., Xu, X., Tian, J., and He, C.: Regional water-energy cycle response to land use/cover change in the agro-pastoral ecotone, Northwest China, Journal of Hydrology, 580, 124246, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124246, 2020
Li, F.: Assessment and fusion of the soil moisture data sets based on community land model and smap satellite (in Chinese), M.S. thesis, Lanzhou Univeristy, 16-40 pp., 2021.
2. Many sentences are very long. It is recommended to shorten them. For example line 45 and line 55.
Response: Thank you. I'll polish them.
3. in line 85. In the form of references.
Response: Thank you. I fixed it.
4. The study area in this paper is not the whole of APENC. The specific location of the study area in the APENC should be introduced.
Response: The study area of this paper is the APENC. In our project, the APENC uses two areas for different research purposes according to the descending line and the administrative district, respectively. The two areas are very similar and both are considered research areas for the project.
5. The contents of Table 1 can be directly elaborated in paper (delete table 1)
Response: Thank you. We delete the table and this expression is kept consistent in the paper.
6. Significance test can be added in Table 5 and Table 6.
Response: Thank you. I have added the result of the significant test.
7. in line 241. November is missing.
Response: Thank you. I have corrected the mistake
8. The conclusion can take the form of paragraphs and should be condensed.
Response: Thank you. I will make the conclusion more condensed.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-AC1
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2287', Inti Lefort, 08 Jan 2024
The subject of the study and the development of the technical-scientific part is consistent and provides important land management data for a large area, using validated land use models. Also, the results are integrated with a Chinese government plan for land use restoration, providing useful information for policy development.
However, there are several things that could be improved; it is a text that in many parts is redundant, for example between L 342 and 346 the same idea is expressed twice without sense, in the same page in L 367 the information presented in table 8 (percentages) is repeated and the SAME information is repeated again in lines 433 and 434. The equations 1,2 y 3 are widely used and it´s not necessary to present them. There is a lot of information (ten tables and fifteen figures!) I suggest reducing this by at least half (ideally less) and leaving some as supplementary material. The results are listed again in the conclusions, it is not necessary to repeat them, also the number 1 (L. 422 and 423) in conclusion Are these study results?. The use of abbreviations is confusing, bareland, cropland, grassland and "BL", "CL", and "GRS" are used indistinctly. It´s not necesary to paste the URL of information in the text body (L. 85 and 86) and it´s repeated in L 340 and 341 redundant, the url should be in the Reference.
The use of water conservation, defined in the water balance Eq 4. (L. 212), implies the use of runoff, it is not explained how this term is approached. In the line 381-382 a part is explained, in the discussion, which should be explained in the methodologyIt is necessary a english gramatical review, there are errors in the use of verbs e.g. L 100 "...with and annually averaged temperature..." should be "...with an average annual temperature" or L 346 a verb in the past tense is used to talk about 2035. The use of "Here" repeatedly in the wrong contexts. the use of commas needs also another revision, for example in the title.
Now a list of particular comments on the text:
L. 33 "violently" it´s out of context this adjective
L. 35 The LUCC is a global mitigation and adaptation strategy in a local context. I suggest adding "adaptation"
L. 66 "Therefore" and "in this context" are redundant
L. 77 using an abbreviation such as "W" may not be correct depending on the journal's guidelines.
L. 85-86 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
L. 100-101 the use of averaged instead of average
L. 102 The term vegetation types is used to refer to land use.
F. 1 The "line" of the river cuts the DEM Legend
F. 3 chart number 20 is missing the metrics
L. 221 The use of "severely"?
L. 234 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
F. 7 the legend use "mm" should be C°
F. 9 The legend "Mean value" it´s not necessary
L. 322 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
L 341-342 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
L. 346 use of "was" talking about 2035
L. 348 I dont understand "so five escenarios, which consider computing time, to represent...."
L.349-350 Repeated information with table 8
L 359. It is repeated many times that the climatic forcings will be left static to isolate the impacts of LUCC, it is not necessary to repeat so many times that, saying that the climatic forcings remain static the rest is understood.
L 440. What does it mean that data will be available upon reasonable request? Normally the data is available without conditionsCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yuzuo Zhu, 05 Feb 2024
- However, there are several things that could be improved; it is a text that in many parts is redundant, for example between L 342 and 346 the same idea is expressed twice without sense, in the same page in L 367 the information presented in table 8 (percentages) is repeated and the SAME information is repeated again in lines 433 and 434.
Response: Thank you. I will polish all the text. - The equations 1,2 y 3 are widely used and it´s not necessary to present them.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. - There is a lot of information (ten tables and fifteen figures!) I suggest reducing this by at least half (ideally less) and leaving some as supplementary material.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. - The results are listed again in the conclusions, it is not necessary to repeat them, also the number 1 (L. 422 and 423) in conclusion Are these study results?.
Response: Thank you. I polished it. - The use of abbreviations is confusing, bareland, cropland, grassland and "BL", "CL", and "GRS" are used indistinctly. It´s not necesary to paste the URL of information in the text body (L. 85 and 86) and it´s repeated in L 340 and 341 redundant, the url should be in the Reference.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. -
The use of water conservation, defined in the water balance Eq 4. (L. 212), implies the use of runoff, it is not explained how this term is approached.
Response: All terms are from the output of the model, including runoff, which was evaluated by section 2.4 and previous work (Deng et al, 2022; Li, 2021; Wang et al, 2019). This expression will be kept consistent in the paper.Deng, M., Meng, X., Lu, Y., Shu, L., Li, Z., Zhao, L., Chen, H., Shang, L., Sheng, D., and Ao, X.: Impact of climatic and vegetation dynamic change on runoff over the Three Rivers Source Region based on the Community Land Model, Climate Dynamics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-022-06619-0, 2022.
Li, F. Assessment and fusion of the soil moisture data sets based on community land model and smap satellite (in Chinese), M.S. thesis, Lanzhou Univeristy, 16-40 pp., 2021.
Wang, H., Xiao, W., Zhao, Y., Wang, Y., Hou, B., Zhou, Y., Yang, H., Zhang, X., and Cui, H.: The Spatiotemporal Variability of Evapotranspiration and Its Response to Climate Change and Land Use/Land Cover Change in the Three Gorges Reservoir, Water, 11, 1739, https://doi.org/10.3390/w11091739, 2019. - In the line 381-382 a part is explained, in the discussion, which should be explained in the methodology
Response: Thank you. I delete it here and put this part into methodology. - It is necessary for a english gramatical review, there are errors in the use of verbs e.g. L 100 "...with and annually averaged temperature..." should be "...with an average annual temperature" or L 346 a verb in the past tense is used to talk about 2035. The use of "Here" repeatedly in the wrong contexts. the use of commas needs also another revision, for example in the title.
Response: Thank you. I revised all “here” in my paper. I will polish all commas in my paper. But I don’t see commas in my title. Can you tell me where it is again? - Now a list of particular comments on the text:
L. 33 "violently" it´s out of context this adjective
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 35 The LUCC is a global mitigation and adaptation strategy in a local context. I suggest adding "adaptation"
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 66 "Therefore" and "in this context" are redundant
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 77 using an abbreviation such as "W" may not be correct depending on the journal's guidelines.
Response: Thank you. I changed it to Wc.
L. 85-86 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 100-101 the use of averaged instead of average
Response: Thank you. I revised all “averaged” in my paper.
L. 102 The term vegetation types is used to refer to land use.
Response: Thank you. I changed it to land use/cover types.
F. 1 The "line" of the river cuts the DEM Legend
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
F. 3 chart number 20 is missing the metrics
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 221 The use of "severely"?
Response: Thank you. I change it to respectively.
L. 234 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
F. 7 the legend use "mm" should be C°
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
F. 9 The legend "Mean value" it´s not necessary
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 322 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L 341-342 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 346 use of "was" talking about 2035
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 348 I dont understand "so five escenarios, which consider computing time, to represent...."
Response: We want to propose different scenarios to meet the requirements of the government. This is to say, the grasslands will increase to 60 %, bare land will decrease from 30 %, and croplands will decrease from 13 % during 2015 to 2035. Countless combinations satisfy this requirement. To save computed time, five scenarios were selected to represent the future.
In the paper, we change the expression: To save computed time, five scenarios were selected to represent the future. The percent of grasslands, bare land and croplands were respectively 60 %, 21 % and 13 % in EXP_602113; 60 %, 23 % and 11 % in EXP_602311; 60 %, 25 % and 9 % in EXP_602509; 60 %, 27 % and 7 % in EXP_602707; 60 %, 30 % and 4 % in EXP_603004.
L.349-350 Repeated information with table 8
Response: Thank you. I delete Table 8.
L 359. It is repeated many times that the climatic forcings will be left static to isolate the impacts of LUCC, it is not necessary to repeat so many times that, saying that the climatic forcings remain static the rest is understood.
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L 440. What does it mean that data will be available upon reasonable request? Normally the data is available without conditions.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. “The data will be made available on request”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-AC2 - However, there are several things that could be improved; it is a text that in many parts is redundant, for example between L 342 and 346 the same idea is expressed twice without sense, in the same page in L 367 the information presented in table 8 (percentages) is repeated and the SAME information is repeated again in lines 433 and 434.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yuzuo Zhu, 05 Feb 2024
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2287', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Nov 2023
APENC is a fragile region in eco-environment. Water is an important fundmental factor affecting the ecological environment in this region. On this base, land use is another factor that affects the ecological environment. From the aspects of hydroclimatic regime and regional ecological management, the paper studied the appropriate land use/cover pattern, which is of great significance to the ecological restoration of this area. The following comments are for your reference.
- The effect of the accuracy of the adopted data on the conclusions should be discussed. Fro example, accuracy of land use data is 0.1°.
- Many sentences are very long. It is recommended to shorten them. For example line 45 and line 55.
- in line 85. In the form of references.
- The study area in this paper is not the whole of APENC. The specific location of the study area in the APENC should be introduced.
- The contents of Table 1 can be directly elaborated in paper (delete table 1)
- Significance test can be added in Table 5 and Table 6.
- in line 241. November is missing.
- The conclusion can take the form of paragraphs and should be condensed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yuzuo Zhu, 05 Feb 2024
We would like to thank you for your constructive and thoughtful comments. We have implemented all of your suggestions which have led to a much improved and complete manuscript. In the following sections, the issues raised by you are addressed in the order.
1. The effect of the accuracy of the adopted data on the conclusions should be discussed. For example, accuracy of land use data is 0.1°.
Response: The land use dataset was produced in previous teamwork (Du et al,). 500 samples were selected to evaluate land use data with field investigation and high-resolution images. The evaluation results show that the overall accuracy of the final classification and KAPPA coefficient are both >0.8, which meets the accuracy requirements. The precision of the land use dataset was trustworthy. This expression is kept consistent in the paper.
The China meteorological forcing dataset and MODIS LST have been widely used including in the study area of previous work (Wang et al, 2020; Li, 2022). Other datasets like GLASS have been evaluated in the papers that produce the data. The uncertainty of soil properties is in the discussion section.
Du, T., Jiao, J., Duan, H., He, H., XUE, X., and Xie, Y.: Study of conversion between land use/landcover classification system of Chinese Academy of Science and IGBP classification system: In the northwest argo-pastoral zone Journal of Lanzhou University: Natural Science (in Chinese), 56, 91-95, https://doi.org/10.13885/j.issn.0455-2059.20120.01.011, 2020
Wang, X., Zhang, B., Xu, X., Tian, J., and He, C.: Regional water-energy cycle response to land use/cover change in the agro-pastoral ecotone, Northwest China, Journal of Hydrology, 580, 124246, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124246, 2020
Li, F.: Assessment and fusion of the soil moisture data sets based on community land model and smap satellite (in Chinese), M.S. thesis, Lanzhou Univeristy, 16-40 pp., 2021.
2. Many sentences are very long. It is recommended to shorten them. For example line 45 and line 55.
Response: Thank you. I'll polish them.
3. in line 85. In the form of references.
Response: Thank you. I fixed it.
4. The study area in this paper is not the whole of APENC. The specific location of the study area in the APENC should be introduced.
Response: The study area of this paper is the APENC. In our project, the APENC uses two areas for different research purposes according to the descending line and the administrative district, respectively. The two areas are very similar and both are considered research areas for the project.
5. The contents of Table 1 can be directly elaborated in paper (delete table 1)
Response: Thank you. We delete the table and this expression is kept consistent in the paper.
6. Significance test can be added in Table 5 and Table 6.
Response: Thank you. I have added the result of the significant test.
7. in line 241. November is missing.
Response: Thank you. I have corrected the mistake
8. The conclusion can take the form of paragraphs and should be condensed.
Response: Thank you. I will make the conclusion more condensed.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-AC1
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2287', Inti Lefort, 08 Jan 2024
The subject of the study and the development of the technical-scientific part is consistent and provides important land management data for a large area, using validated land use models. Also, the results are integrated with a Chinese government plan for land use restoration, providing useful information for policy development.
However, there are several things that could be improved; it is a text that in many parts is redundant, for example between L 342 and 346 the same idea is expressed twice without sense, in the same page in L 367 the information presented in table 8 (percentages) is repeated and the SAME information is repeated again in lines 433 and 434. The equations 1,2 y 3 are widely used and it´s not necessary to present them. There is a lot of information (ten tables and fifteen figures!) I suggest reducing this by at least half (ideally less) and leaving some as supplementary material. The results are listed again in the conclusions, it is not necessary to repeat them, also the number 1 (L. 422 and 423) in conclusion Are these study results?. The use of abbreviations is confusing, bareland, cropland, grassland and "BL", "CL", and "GRS" are used indistinctly. It´s not necesary to paste the URL of information in the text body (L. 85 and 86) and it´s repeated in L 340 and 341 redundant, the url should be in the Reference.
The use of water conservation, defined in the water balance Eq 4. (L. 212), implies the use of runoff, it is not explained how this term is approached. In the line 381-382 a part is explained, in the discussion, which should be explained in the methodologyIt is necessary a english gramatical review, there are errors in the use of verbs e.g. L 100 "...with and annually averaged temperature..." should be "...with an average annual temperature" or L 346 a verb in the past tense is used to talk about 2035. The use of "Here" repeatedly in the wrong contexts. the use of commas needs also another revision, for example in the title.
Now a list of particular comments on the text:
L. 33 "violently" it´s out of context this adjective
L. 35 The LUCC is a global mitigation and adaptation strategy in a local context. I suggest adding "adaptation"
L. 66 "Therefore" and "in this context" are redundant
L. 77 using an abbreviation such as "W" may not be correct depending on the journal's guidelines.
L. 85-86 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
L. 100-101 the use of averaged instead of average
L. 102 The term vegetation types is used to refer to land use.
F. 1 The "line" of the river cuts the DEM Legend
F. 3 chart number 20 is missing the metrics
L. 221 The use of "severely"?
L. 234 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
F. 7 the legend use "mm" should be C°
F. 9 The legend "Mean value" it´s not necessary
L. 322 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
L 341-342 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
L. 346 use of "was" talking about 2035
L. 348 I dont understand "so five escenarios, which consider computing time, to represent...."
L.349-350 Repeated information with table 8
L 359. It is repeated many times that the climatic forcings will be left static to isolate the impacts of LUCC, it is not necessary to repeat so many times that, saying that the climatic forcings remain static the rest is understood.
L 440. What does it mean that data will be available upon reasonable request? Normally the data is available without conditionsCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yuzuo Zhu, 05 Feb 2024
- However, there are several things that could be improved; it is a text that in many parts is redundant, for example between L 342 and 346 the same idea is expressed twice without sense, in the same page in L 367 the information presented in table 8 (percentages) is repeated and the SAME information is repeated again in lines 433 and 434.
Response: Thank you. I will polish all the text. - The equations 1,2 y 3 are widely used and it´s not necessary to present them.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. - There is a lot of information (ten tables and fifteen figures!) I suggest reducing this by at least half (ideally less) and leaving some as supplementary material.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. - The results are listed again in the conclusions, it is not necessary to repeat them, also the number 1 (L. 422 and 423) in conclusion Are these study results?.
Response: Thank you. I polished it. - The use of abbreviations is confusing, bareland, cropland, grassland and "BL", "CL", and "GRS" are used indistinctly. It´s not necesary to paste the URL of information in the text body (L. 85 and 86) and it´s repeated in L 340 and 341 redundant, the url should be in the Reference.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. -
The use of water conservation, defined in the water balance Eq 4. (L. 212), implies the use of runoff, it is not explained how this term is approached.
Response: All terms are from the output of the model, including runoff, which was evaluated by section 2.4 and previous work (Deng et al, 2022; Li, 2021; Wang et al, 2019). This expression will be kept consistent in the paper.Deng, M., Meng, X., Lu, Y., Shu, L., Li, Z., Zhao, L., Chen, H., Shang, L., Sheng, D., and Ao, X.: Impact of climatic and vegetation dynamic change on runoff over the Three Rivers Source Region based on the Community Land Model, Climate Dynamics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-022-06619-0, 2022.
Li, F. Assessment and fusion of the soil moisture data sets based on community land model and smap satellite (in Chinese), M.S. thesis, Lanzhou Univeristy, 16-40 pp., 2021.
Wang, H., Xiao, W., Zhao, Y., Wang, Y., Hou, B., Zhou, Y., Yang, H., Zhang, X., and Cui, H.: The Spatiotemporal Variability of Evapotranspiration and Its Response to Climate Change and Land Use/Land Cover Change in the Three Gorges Reservoir, Water, 11, 1739, https://doi.org/10.3390/w11091739, 2019. - In the line 381-382 a part is explained, in the discussion, which should be explained in the methodology
Response: Thank you. I delete it here and put this part into methodology. - It is necessary for a english gramatical review, there are errors in the use of verbs e.g. L 100 "...with and annually averaged temperature..." should be "...with an average annual temperature" or L 346 a verb in the past tense is used to talk about 2035. The use of "Here" repeatedly in the wrong contexts. the use of commas needs also another revision, for example in the title.
Response: Thank you. I revised all “here” in my paper. I will polish all commas in my paper. But I don’t see commas in my title. Can you tell me where it is again? - Now a list of particular comments on the text:
L. 33 "violently" it´s out of context this adjective
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 35 The LUCC is a global mitigation and adaptation strategy in a local context. I suggest adding "adaptation"
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 66 "Therefore" and "in this context" are redundant
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 77 using an abbreviation such as "W" may not be correct depending on the journal's guidelines.
Response: Thank you. I changed it to Wc.
L. 85-86 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 100-101 the use of averaged instead of average
Response: Thank you. I revised all “averaged” in my paper.
L. 102 The term vegetation types is used to refer to land use.
Response: Thank you. I changed it to land use/cover types.
F. 1 The "line" of the river cuts the DEM Legend
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
F. 3 chart number 20 is missing the metrics
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 221 The use of "severely"?
Response: Thank you. I change it to respectively.
L. 234 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
F. 7 the legend use "mm" should be C°
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
F. 9 The legend "Mean value" it´s not necessary
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 322 "here" it´s wrong used in that way
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L 341-342 the urls should be in the corresponding reference
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 346 use of "was" talking about 2035
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L. 348 I dont understand "so five escenarios, which consider computing time, to represent...."
Response: We want to propose different scenarios to meet the requirements of the government. This is to say, the grasslands will increase to 60 %, bare land will decrease from 30 %, and croplands will decrease from 13 % during 2015 to 2035. Countless combinations satisfy this requirement. To save computed time, five scenarios were selected to represent the future.
In the paper, we change the expression: To save computed time, five scenarios were selected to represent the future. The percent of grasslands, bare land and croplands were respectively 60 %, 21 % and 13 % in EXP_602113; 60 %, 23 % and 11 % in EXP_602311; 60 %, 25 % and 9 % in EXP_602509; 60 %, 27 % and 7 % in EXP_602707; 60 %, 30 % and 4 % in EXP_603004.
L.349-350 Repeated information with table 8
Response: Thank you. I delete Table 8.
L 359. It is repeated many times that the climatic forcings will be left static to isolate the impacts of LUCC, it is not necessary to repeat so many times that, saying that the climatic forcings remain static the rest is understood.
Response: Thank you. I revised it.
L 440. What does it mean that data will be available upon reasonable request? Normally the data is available without conditions.
Response: Thank you. I revised it. “The data will be made available on request”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2287-AC2 - However, there are several things that could be improved; it is a text that in many parts is redundant, for example between L 342 and 346 the same idea is expressed twice without sense, in the same page in L 367 the information presented in table 8 (percentages) is repeated and the SAME information is repeated again in lines 433 and 434.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yuzuo Zhu, 05 Feb 2024
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 394 | 137 | 41 | 572 | 38 | 45 |
- HTML: 394
- PDF: 137
- XML: 41
- Total: 572
- BibTeX: 38
- EndNote: 45
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States of America | 1 | 190 | 33 |
| China | 2 | 84 | 14 |
| Germany | 3 | 77 | 13 |
| India | 4 | 25 | 4 |
| France | 5 | 23 | 4 |
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 190