Grain-Size Analysis of Middle Cretaceous Sandstone Reservoirs, the Wasia Formation, Riyadh Province, Saudi Arabia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Regarding the work “Grain-Size Analysis and Depositional Environment of Middle Cretaceous Sandstone Reservoirs, the Wasia Formation, Riyadh Province, Saudi Arabia”.
The following should be considered:
• The summary should be improved because it is ambiguous.
• The bibliography must be updated because there is little updated bibliography.
• The figures and tables should be improved, and be in an appropriate and legible format.
Regarding the objective of the work, it should be highlighted; likewise, the working hypothesis should be included. On the other hand, emphasis should be given to the innovation of the work and its specific contribution, and the conclusions should be improved.
Meanwhile, it is advisable to compare with other models and their meaning, such as the Gaudin-Schumann and Rosin-Rammler models, and discuss their relevance, likewise, it would be interesting to add some analysis of the type of Z potential particle analyzer, or some XRD analysis to determine crystal size and crystallinity, or SEM for particle distribution.
Finally, as it can be inferred from their work that they are recognizing a zone of transgression, it is extremely important to indicate the formation (rock) of interest, its thickness and upper and lower contacts to delimit it in time and space. What are the lateral and vertical changes of the formation being studied? How to recognize them physically? What are the depths of the horizons studied, their thicknesses, by lithology? Is the geological behavior different? What is the stratigraphic and structural configuration of those horizons of interest?
On the horizons of geological interest, the geological sections (stratigraphic - structural), structural plans with integration of lithofacies of interest, at levels of chrono-stratigraphic horizons, are important.
The following should be considered:
• The summary should be improved because it is ambiguous.
• The bibliography should be reviewed for this uniform format and should be updated.
• Figure 1 should be improved, should be of a suitable size with readable format and should be explained.
Author Response
Thank you for allowing me to resubmit the manuscript to Sustainability Journal in a revised form. The author is grateful for your time and effort in replying to the manuscript with insightful questions, comments, and ideas. All submitted comments and recommendations were carefully reviewed, and the track-changes function was used to make the necessary modifications. The author's (point-by-point) responses to your comments and recommendations are provided in the attached documents.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for allowing me to resubmit the manuscript to Sustainability Journal in a revised form. The author is grateful for your time and effort in replying to the manuscript with insightful questions, comments, and ideas. All submitted comments and recommendations were carefully reviewed, and the track-changes function was used to make the necessary modifications. The author's (point-by-point) responses to your comments and recommendations are provided in the attached documents.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear author,
I have gone through your MS and it looks good to see your good effort. There are the following major and minor comments;
· Only grain-size analysis is not enough for interpretation of the deposition environment, you should add more evidence for this in regards
· What methods did you follow for the sample collection, Was it random, or something else?
· Result and discussion part is quite confusing; improve your abstract and conclusion as well.
Minor comment:
· Revise the title: Grain-Size Analysis of Middle Cretaceous Sandstone Reservoirs, the Wasia Formation, Riyadh Province, Saudi Arabia implication to the Depositional Environment
· Correct grammar and sentence structures entire the paper
· Plenty of repeated sentences need to improve and Rephrase Sentences
Fig.1:
· Follow the stratigraphic rule, for legends older in the lower position
· Reference is missing in the figure caption
· Only focus on the study area map, no need to show the large-scale geological map
· Sample location map needs to be present for more visibility
Sample Collection:
· References missing in figure and equation
· Rewrite it in another way, it's a too simple sentence (Line 116-126)
· In lines 72- 75, you mentioned that Wasia Formation includes 7 members, so in the sample location and table, you must mention which of the samples are belongs to those units.
· Combined a figure 4 to 8 and 9 to 11 in a single one respectively
· Show the discussion in a tabular from how the deposition environments were associated with the facies elements to your studies samples
In general speaking, your paper needs extensive revision for further steps. You may find more comments on the annotated pdf
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Correct grammar and sentence structures entire the paper
Author Response
Thank you for allowing me to resubmit the manuscript to Sustainability Journal in a revised form. The author is grateful for your time and effort in replying to the manuscript with insightful questions, comments, and ideas. All submitted comments and recommendations were carefully reviewed, and the track-changes function was used to make the necessary modifications. The author's (point-by-point) responses to your comments and recommendations are provided in the attached documents.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Author,
I can see it somehow improved. However, without adding some additional data, It's hard to interpret your research hypothesis. So the main concern is to add some other works that give more validation to your work. It seems you applied random sampling.
- Figure 1 needs to be modified, you may highlight your sample location (add one more figure that seems more clear), add a sample location for each of them
- Your revised title looks too specific and wondering to publish it in this reputable journal
- It does not matter there are many publications only deling with grain-size analysis, adding more data gives your publication more reliable
Hope to see you improve MS
Minor improvement needed
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
