System Dynamics and Graphical Interface Modeling of a Fig-Derived Micro-Producer Factory

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The six stages method is interesting, and it could effectively support companies in the decision-making process. However, it is necessary to improve the structure of the paper to generalize the method and make the methodological steps more understandable and repeatable.

- Keywords: fig is very specific;

- Introduction: it contains very specific information about figs, but some of them are not useful for understanding the research;

-Methods. it is necessary to better explain this part. More information about the link between the tools and the stages is necessary. Some information in the results section should be shifted in section 2, adding further information (e.g., KPIs use, selection, and explanation; the functions and objectives of the methods; the number of simulations. In this version, the methodology is too specific, and it is not possible to understand how to apply and adapt it in other contexts;

- Discussion: it is not easy to understand how the methods have been used to support the decision-making process;

- Conclusion: please, do not repeat sentences.

- General: please, pay attention to punctuation after references in the text.

Author Response

Dear reviewer 1, thank you for your suggestions on our work, we now attach the new MS with the answers in red color for you, as well as a separate file where the answers to each suggestion are given.

Thanks again for your contributions

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

GENERAL

In general, the manuscript (MS) is relatively well written. The ideas are well structured, and there is a good accompaniment of figures and tables.

The MS does not present the objective of the work in the Introduction in a convenient way. I suggest that the objective of the work be added in the last paragraph of the introduction.

Since the Introduction is included in the literature review, the article shows that it is relatively short in the literature. I suggest they are mentioned as references to some parts of the MS that are mentioned by some authors without literature support.

SPECIFIC

The scientific name of the fig species should be in italics (Lines 30, 56, 93, 212 and perhaps others). Additionally, it just needs to come complete the first time it is displayed (i.e., Ficus carica). In the following times, just come the specific epithet (i.e., F. carica).

The term used to represent several authors is poorly punctuated. It should be “et al.” and eventualy in italics.

Lines 35-6: I believe there is some confusion about the dimensions of the tree and the fruit. Please correct it correctly.

Sometimes a full stop follows a reference without it being the end of the sentence (e.g., lines 92, 101, 107, 112, 11, possibly others). The existence of this full stop does not make any sense. Please remove it.

Lines 199-200: Please check if the dimension of the area is in accordance with the number of trees. It seems to me that: Either the size of the area is too small to accommodate the number of trees mentioned, or that the number of trees is too large for the area in question. Please correct.

Full reference to software just makes sense the first time. In the remaining times, it is enough to refer to the name of the software, without indicating other details.

Lines 217-8: What is the true meaning of this phrase? Please rewrite.

Some typos can be found on the lines: 266 (one word was left accidentally in Spanish), 279 and 371 (words misspelled), 546 (where there is a comma should come a full stop).

Lines 390-3: What is the true meaning of this sentence? It looks like something is missing. Please rewrite.

The main text lacks reference to table 4.

At the beginning of the Discussion - lines 499-502 - the sentences don't make sense to come here. Please relocate to another paragraph than the beginning of the discussion.

The Discussion is a little short. Although there is some literature supporting some arguments in the Discussion, it should be further developed in order to reinforce the value of the MS.

Author Response

Dear reviewer 2, thank you for your suggestions in our work, now we attach the new MS with the answers in purple color for you, as well as a separate file where the answers to each suggestion are given.

Thanks again for your contributions

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

MS has improved considerably. Still, some small things remain incorrect or still need to be changed accordingly. Please review and correct the following:

L 36-7: This sentence is still confusing. As it is written, the reader cannot distinguish the dimensions of the tree and the fruit, because it is explained in a confusing way. Please rewrite it clearly.

L 118: Ref 19 still doesn't have the correct "et al.".

Likewise the "." pointless period that comes later, remains. Please also delete this period.

L 279 (now L 304): The word "retailers" is still incorrect. Please fix this.

Author Response

There are the responses for the reviewer of our paper, attached is the new version of MS.

Please see in the MS highlighted in yellow the answers offered to the new suggestions.

L 36-7: This sentence is still confusing. As it is written, the reader cannot distinguish the dimensions of the tree and the fruit, because it is explained in a confusing way. Please rewrite it clearly.

RESPONSE: Thank you again, this is the new paragraph:

The fig is the edible fruit of F. carica, a robust tree that comes from the family Moraceae. The tree may reach 10 m in height, 6 or 7 cm in length, and 4.5 to 5.5 cm in diameter. The fig fruit –3–5 cm long, green skin that ripens to purple or brown– is seasonal, thus

 

L 118: Ref 19 still doesn't have the correct "et al.".

RESPONSE: Done….  Villalobos et al. has

Likewise the "." pointless period that comes later, remains. Please also delete this period.:

RESPONSE: Done

 

L 279 (now L 304): The word "retailers" is still incorrect. Please fix this. Done

RESPONSE: …as well as the sale of four subproducts to sellers for their distribution in the different markets.

Thank you again for your invaluable support in improving our MS

Ernesto A. Lagarda

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf