Application of the Analytic Network Process for Sub-Watershed Prioritization in the Huehuetan River Basin, Chiapas, Mexico

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General Comments on the Work:

• The scientific relevance of the work is strong, and the scope aligns well with that of the journal.
• Although English corrections have been made, the language in the introduction still requires significant improvement. Some sentences are overly long and confusing. I have made some suggestions in the text, but I recommend a thorough review of the entire section to enhance clarity.
• The introduction could also benefit from a stronger focus on the Analytical Network Process. I suggest improving the literature references by including other studies that have applied a similar approach.
• I have noted some concerns regarding the Materials and Methods section in the PDF I am submitting. My main concern is the use of data from different time periods. For instance, SWAT data covers 1964-1994, while NDVI analyses were conducted for different time frames. Please verify whether this discrepancy could affect your results.
• The results section is generally acceptable. Please review my specific suggestions.
• In the conclusion, it would be helpful to propose potential mitigation strategies for the impacts observed in the sub-watersheds, especially for those most affected.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English needs improvement, particularly in the Introduction and Materials & Methods sections.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Application of the Analytic Network Process for sub-watershed prioritization in the Huehuetan River Basin, Chiapas, Mexico is an interesting endeavor, but the current manuscript, which is more like a research report than a research paper, needs a lot of changes to make it more relevant to a research paper.

1.     Overall, the innovation of the paper needs to be further clarified.

2.     The manuscript needs a native English speaker for language polishing.

3.     The abstract needs to give a quantitative analysis rather than a simple qualitative expression.

4.     The introduction should focus on the current research progress to show the shortcomings of the current research, in this respect, the manuscript needs to be further modified and improved.

5.     In Figure 1, the compass and the warp and weft net can choose one of the two.

6.     In this manuscript, the methods used are relatively conventional, how to reflect the innovation?

7.     In this manuscript, the results and discussion sections are suggested to be written separately.

8.     In this manuscript, the title of different parts is repeated and needs to be revised.

9.     In Figure 6, the problems of the warp and weft net and compass also need to be modified.

10.  The conclusion needs to be further summarized and condensed.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 The manuscript needs a native English speaker for language polishing.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Excellent work carried out with a great combination of computer tools that have made possible a series of results in the hierarchisation of sub-basins in the Huehuetan river basin. Hydrological, morphological, slope stabilisation and socio-economic aspects have been combined to integrate the main factors in the management of a basin at all levels.

I am familiar with the basin under study and I understand the problems described, so I consider myself a reviewer lucky enough to find that there is a technical solution to these situations in which tropical rains occur recurrently and have serious effects on riverbeds and slopes, causing great material and human damage.

After carefully reading the article, I accept the job in its present form.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We appreciate your comments on our research work on sub-watershed prioritization. Currently, the HRB frequently experiences natural disasters due to its inherent characteristics. Therefore, it is important to define integrated river basin management plans for establishing water management and soil conservation practices, particularly in areas with steep slopes, to reduce the effects of intense rainfall. For this reason, we applied the ANP model methodology to establish the basis for prioritizing sub-watersheds.

 

Sincerely,

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although the manuscript has undergone a round of revision, there are still many problems to be improved.

1.      The abstract of the manuscript needs to quantitatively present the research results, and the revised version still needs to be improved and perfected in this respect.

2.      In Figure 1, either latitude or longitude or compass is sufficient.

3.      In Figure 2, it is also possible to choose one or the other of latitude and longitude and compass.

4.      In the part of research methods, if it is a conventional method, there is no need to do too much description, and specific references can be given.

5.      Figure 3 needs further embellishment.

6.      In the third part of the manuscript, it is suggested to write the results and discussion separately.

7.      The entire manuscript requires further polishing by a native English speaker.

8.      The results of the manuscript with the discussion section are suggested to be further condensed, and the current focus of the writing is not prominent.

9.      The conclusion of the manuscript needs to be further condensed.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The entire manuscript requires further polishing by a native English speaker.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf