Seismic Sequence Analysis of the Arraiolos Zone, South Portugal, and Its Seismotectonic Implications: A Detailed Analysis of the Period 15 January–30 June 2018
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Very good work, well documented. Νo major coreections
A minor correction in figure 1. Use a light colour (yellow, orrange, light blue) to mark the study are in figure 1 (left).
Lines 271-281. the topography is not clear and therefore the correlation cannot be identified. Suggestion, compile anothe map with better resolution.
Author Response
Thank you for your compliment!
We are very grateful for the time you dedicated to reviewing the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which allowed us to improve the description of this manuscript. Below, are our point-by-point responses to each comment.
- A minor correction in figure 1. Use a light color (yellow, orange, light blue) to mark the study are in figure 1 (left).
Response: We fully agree with your comment. The correction was made in the figure 1, using the orange color to mark the study area in figure 1 (left) (Pag. 2).
- Lines 271-281. the topography is not clear and therefore the correlation cannot be identified. Suggestion, compile anothe map with better resolution.
Response: This comment is pertinent. We compiled another map, using software that allowed us to obtain a background with better resolution (Fig. 7, page 10) that allows us to better correlate the topography of the area and the distribution of epicenters.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Review of Remote Sensing manuscript: Seismic Sequence Analysis of the Arraiolos Zone, South Portugal, and its Seismotectonic Implications: A Detailed Analysis of the Period 15 January – 30 June, 2018
The manuscript is well written. The seismic analysis is very important, but this work is missing the seismic hazard assessment as well as the seismic impacts on landforms. Something else, I personally recommend to geo-correlations between active faults zones with ML intensity (GIS correlation is recommended).
Some few notes mentioned below:
Figure 1 not clear.
Page 2. Line 76 the different collected data source specification and uncertainties are required.
Interpolation map of ML shows the intensity from the epicenter is required
In addition, please, explain why you choose 30 km radius?
Figure 2. Should be Vectorization using GIS software, some symbols in the map was missed in the legend
Table 1. should be move to appendix section, in the results section you should analysis the table in maps and figures.
In figure 3. The attitude color is not suitable.
In figure 6. Subfigures alphabetic missed.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
We express our gratitude for your detailed review of the manuscript, for your valuable comments and constructive suggestions which significantly contributes to the improvement of the manuscript.
Below, we have presented the responses point-by-point to your comments:
- The seismic analysis is very important, but this work is missing the seismic hazard assessment as well as the seismic impacts on landforms. Something else, I personally recommend to geo-correlation between active faults zones with ML intensity (GIS correlation is recommended).
Response: This comment is pertinent and we thank you in advance. However, the broader subject on the assessment of seismic hazard will be developed in another study. Also, we agree with the suggestion you make about using GIS for this analysis. In this sense, we compiled a map (using GIS) to relate active fault zones to epicenters distribution (Figure 7, Pag. 10) and topography. In the Aldeia da Serra area, there are three important geological structures, namely: the Lineament of São Gregório (to the north) the escarpment of Aldeia da Serra (N–S direction) and the streams that coincide with the Santana do Campo fault.
Some few notes mentioned below:
- Figure 1 not clear.
Response: The correction was made in the Figure 1, using the orange color to mark the study area in figure 1 (left) (Pag. 2).
- Page 2. Line 76 the different collected data source specification and uncertainties are required. Interpolation map of ML shows the intensity from the epicenter is required. In addition, please, explain why you choose 30 km radius?
Response: We agree with these comments. It really is necessary to include the different specifications and uncertainties. Therefore, the different specifications and uncertainties of the collected data sources were included (Page 2, lines 78 - 84). In this section we added a table (Table 1).
We have added detailed description the intensity from the epicenter (Page 2, line 85 – 92).
Response: The reasons for choosing the deployment of the seismic network within a radius of 30 km, were explained on page 3, line 98 – 99. The study area is characterized by a persistent and low magnitude seismicity (M<4) and some events of higher magnitude (M > 4). In order to fill in the poor azimuthal coverage of these events, and to improve the location of the events detected by the permanent networks, it was necessary to deploy the temporary network in a tighter radius around the study area to fill this gap.
- Figure 2. Should be Vectorization using GIS software, some symbols in the mapwas missed in the legend.
Response: Thank you for your observation. We have added the symbols that was not in the legend (Fig. 2, Page 5).
- Table 1. should be move to appendix section, in the results section you should analysis the table in maps and figures.
Response: We agree with this suggestion, as it allows the reader to read more fluidly. Therefore, the Table 1 (Section 5.2) has been moved to the Appendix Section, and it was numbered Table 4 (Pag. 29 – 31).
- In figure 3. The attitude color is not suitable.
Response: We compiled another map with the appropriate altitude color scale (Fig. 3, Pag. 6).
- In figure 6. Subfigures alphabetic missed.
Response: In figure 6 (Pag. 9) the alphabetic indications (a) and (b) were included in the respective subfigures.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Everything is fine. please cite this paper
Barfal, S. S., Das, M. M., Joshi, M., Joshi, R., Kumar, K., Kumar, D., & Rai, Y. K. (2022). Response of water springs towards an earthquake: A case study from Sikkim Himalaya. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 206, 104792.
Author Response
We are thankful for your revision made to the manuscript and your suggestion. Below, the response to your suggestion are presented.
- Everything is fine. please cite this paper.
- Barfal, S. S., Das, M. M., Joshi, M., Joshi, R., Kumar, K., Kumar, D., & Rai, Y. K. (2022). Response of water springs towards an earthquake: A case study from Sikkim Himalaya. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 206, 104792.
Response: We thank you for your suggestions!
We have added na text in Section 1 to cite this article on page 2 (lines 54 – 57).
Added text:
Several studies carried out in tectonically active mountainous areas, for example [14], suggests that in addition to the surficial deformations and risks that earthquakes can cause, also influence the hydrogeological conditions of a region.
References
- Barfal, S. S., Das, M. M., Joshi, M., Joshi, R., Kumar, K., Kumar, D., & Rai, Y. K. Response of water springs towards an earthquake: A case study from Sikkim Himalaya. Journal of Applied Geophysics. 2022, 206, 104792.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
