Peer review report 2 on “Differential response of alpine steppe and alpine meadow to climate warming in the central Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau”

Peer review report 2 on “Differential response of alpine steppe and alpine meadow to climate warming in the central Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau”

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 217 (2016) 334 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Agricultural and Forest Meteorology journal homepage: w...

119KB Sizes 5 Downloads 48 Views

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 217 (2016) 334

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agrformet

Peer Review Report

Peer review report 2 on “Differential response of alpine steppe and alpine meadow to climate warming in the central Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau”

Original Submission Recommendation Major Revision Comments to Author: This paper conducted three years field warming experiment based on OTC to evaluate differential response in two typical grassland ecosystems, alpine steppe and alpine meadow, on the TP. This research is important because the grassland on the TP encompasses a wide area, vulnerable to impacts from both climate change and human activity, but relatively little is known about plant changes under climate warming, especially the differential responses in different ecosystem and different species. It is of great value to present a theoretical basis to predict the future changes in this special region under ongoing climate warming scenarios.

DOI of published article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2016.03.017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2016.11.085 0168-1923/

However, there are a number of areas that need further improvement. Current “Introduction” failed to bring out the objectives of this experiment in a persuasive way. Many results in this manuscript don’t display correctly because of lack of evidences or the disagreements between figures and the context. In “Conclusion”, some conclusions are far-fetched because they were not based on a commendable discussion and citations of specific references. In addition, some figures and literal expression should also be improved. Details were following in this document. Overall this is an interesting study in the special region (TP). With better explanation of the statistics and Figures, this will be a good publication. Therefore, my opinion is “major revise before accepting”. Details are contained in the additional document “Review AFM, D-15-00768.docx”. Anonymous Available online 2 December 2016