The Impact of Spatiotemporal Changes in Land Development (1984–2019) on the Increase in the Runoff Coefficient in Erbil, Kurdistan Region of Iraq
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Paper present results of hydrological modeling rainfall-runoff type supported by RS data preparation. Generally it is interesting region of the World and information on its development is not common. I would suggest forllowing improements:
1/ Fig. 4 and other figures do not show hydrographic network, so we do not where the water flows. It is not clear what means scale - low and high. Is it altitude ?
Table 2. I do not understand the content of the table with "producers" and "users" accuracy.
Tab. 3 shows that the water was not detected at images after year 2004. What happend at that time and later ?
One important thing is missing in the paper namely the procedure of hydrological model verification. Usually in hydrological modeling we compare calculated versus observed flow. This step was neglected.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The work done by authors is an interesting and new concept. However, some suggestions are proposed for further improvement.
LN 186: It is better to explain how many training sites you have selected. Your explanation (more than 20 training sites…) do not research-oriented.
LN 199: 75 points are not sufficient for the accuracy assessment process. The study area is extended around 508 km2, with five types of LULC classes. With this background, the results of Table 2 may not be accurate. Further, what you mean by zero value in the water class in Table 1. Hence, around 500 sample points are recommended. Please refer the given sources for more information. (https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/7/8/99/htm / https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/11/15/1743/htm ). The same question regarding water has observed in Figure 5. There is a water area on the map in 1994, but its extended area is zero in the pic chart.
I have observed that most of the maps are not in the correct format. The study area map should be regenerated. Please refer the given source. Figure 5: Basic map components (scale, north arrow..) are missing. Generally, red color is most suitable for the built-up area. Finally, please try to make a consistency among the figures.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Paper contain necessary information and was improved by the authors according to reviewer suggestions.
Author Response
Thank you for your letter and the opportunity to revise our manuscript for the second round on "The Impact of Spatiotemporal Changes in Land Development (1984-2019) on the Increase in the Runoff Coefficient in Erbil, Kurdistan Region of Iraq". We appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper.
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript has been improved
Author Response
Thank you for your letter and the opportunity to revise our manuscript for the second round on "The Impact of Spatiotemporal Changes in Land Development (1984-2019) on the Increase in the Runoff Coefficient in Erbil, Kurdistan Region of Iraq". We appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper.
