All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
The revision of the manuscript has significantly improved its quality. The results of the study presented in the manuscript are substantiated and relevant. The manuscript is written in high-quality English and in accordance with the requirements of PeerJ.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Dezene Huber, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
No comments
No comments
No comments
No comments
The submitted manuscript corresponds to the direction of the journal and may become a positive contribution to science in the future. However, after the second review, the reviewer still has comments on the quality of the manuscript, which requires some more revision. Please pay special attention to Section 4.4. and the comments that the reviewers have indicated now and have been stated in previous reviews.
No comments
No comments
As already emphasized, there are quite a number of studies on coastal defences incorporating the use of coastal vegetations and manmade infrastructures (embankments). Section 4.4 needs to be thoroughly discussed in comparison to other relevant studies, for more meaningful conclusions.
The quality of the resubmitted manuscript is significantly better and contains sound research results. One of the reviewers still has minor comments on the manuscript, which I ask you to respond to.
No comment
No comment
There is too many mention of T. austromongolica in your discussion. you should compare your findings to other vegetation or wetland plants like spartina alterniflora, phragmites australis, S. Salsa etc. There are quite a number of studies on these and other vegetative plants with respect to coastal embankment. without such comparisons, your conclusions would just be lopsided. So do revise your introduction, discussion & conclusions. (since you said "Tamarix austromongolica play the most important roles in this area", then how does it compare to spartina alterniflora and P. Australis for example in east China or other parts of the world.)
I have no special comments.
I have no special comments.
I have no special comments.
I have no special comments.
The problem of determining the effectiveness of dams in order to minimize the threats of catastrophic water-related hazards is important and relevant. The paper investigates their impact on natural forests and identifies the qualitative features of the dam-shrub system. The spatial and age structure of vegetation in the study area was determined. The research was conducted on dams south of Laizhou bay China.
The manuscript is in line with the direction of the journal and deepens the knowledge of regional research in the field. During the review process, experts identified shortcomings in the study results. In order to improve the quality of the manuscript, please consider the recommendations of the reviewers. The English translation also requires professional improvement.
**Language Note:** We note that PeerJ had already provided language editing services but you submitted the original, unedited manuscript. Please ensure that you make your revisions in the copyedited manuscript file, not the one you submitted. – PeerJ Staff
1. there are some serious grammatical errors within the text that need be addresses. for instance lines 50-51, 85-86. the overall grammar of the manuscript needs revision, especially introduction. authors should seek professional services of fluent English speakers.
2. study background should be improved. the synergistic role of embankment dams and coastal plants/ shrubs should be reviewed.
1. why did the investigators choose the months June and august for survey/sampling?. perhaps they should have considered spatio-temporal (seasonal) variations for the whole year.
2. why did authors adopt Ripley's K and K1,2 functions for analysis and not other functions?
3.all equations should be numbered and variables properly defined.
1. in dammed coastal ecosystems, vegetation naturally tends to flourish better on the inland side compared to the riparian side. as such, the novelty of the research seems to be challenged. perhaps authors should have compared embanked and unembanked sections of the ecosystem for a more meaningful validations.
2. "The dominant native plants around the Laizhou bay are Tamarix austromongolica, Phragmites australis and Suaeda salsa". why did the authors choose Tamarix austromongolica, and leave out the other native plants?. don't they have roles in controlling storm surges?
3. conclusions are rather bleak. what are the global implications of your findings? and what are your recommendations to stakeholders and ecosystem managers?
1.maintain the use of "embankment dams" throughout the manuscript since there are different kind of dams.
2. keywords are rather misplaced. do revise!
In the title, coastal shrubs should be Tamarix austromongolica because Tamarix austromongolica is only one shrub species to be studied in our sites.
1. The quadrats were selected randomly in the survey one. Please explain more about random selection method.
2. One of the study purposes is to investigate into the effects of embankment dams on T. austromongolica populations. But the explanations of the dams such as structures and design were deficient. Please add the explanations on dams more.
1. At the eighth page, the Ripley's K was shown lower than the 97.5% line in Fig. 31. But the authors seems to describe conversely. Please check this again.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.