Optimal Water Resources Allocation in the Yinma River Basin in Jilin Province, China, Using Fuzzy Programming

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Fuzzy programming based optimal water resources allocation in a watershed: a case study of the Yinma River Basin in Jilin Province, China

 

Dear authors,

I have read the manuscript with interest and would like to send my review comments. 

Turnitin scores are lower than 20% for similarity; therefore, the manuscript can be moved to review section.

Language issues - Overall manuscript is written to an acceptable level. However, there are many grammar and style issues. Therefore, a thorough proof reading is highly required probably by a native speaker.

1. Title - revise the title for more clarity. At the present title, the readership is confused.

"Optimal water resources allocation of Yinma River Basin in Jilin Province, China using fuzzy programming" would be an easy title and can be understood. Just a suggestion though. 

Abstract - Flow the abstract with a solid research gap and showcase your approaches and the success of them. I think, this is missing. Strengthened the Research Gap.

Introduction - For sure, when you look at a case study, it is always challenging to showcase the novelty. However, be case specific in novelty. Good number of references are cited in the introduction; however, it would be better to look at the other parts of the world and their research inputs. Better to enhance the research gap and your process to achieve the gap.

 

Model development - You have 17 equations. Do you think a reader would suddenly understand them? Your presentation is really weak here. Give the physical meaning of them as much as you can. 

f1-f5 are objective functions of your study, aren't they? Try to explain their importance and physical behavior.

What is your overall methodology? It is totally missing here.

 

Results and Discussions -

Panshi

industrial [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

municipal [0.00，0.00]

[0.00，0.00]

[0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

ecological [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

agricultural [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

Yongji

industrial [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

municipal [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

ecological [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

agricultural [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

Shuangyang

industrial [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

municipal [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

ecological [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

agricultural [0.00， 0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

Jiutai

industrial [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

municipal [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

ecological [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

agricultural [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00] [0.00，0.00]

 

What are your thought of presenting them in a table?

Aren't you missing something here?

You have many results. But there is no presentation of them and a proper discussion based on the physical explanations.

Summary - Don't you have conclusions from your work?

Authors are advised to re-structure the manuscript and present the work with a clear way. If not just presenting many results would NOT be a journal paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Manuscript is good with new scientific input, well written but some of the things need to be improved.

L33 give full form of COD, written first time

L38 layman reader will not understand IFTSP

L38 delete (YRB) 

L54 20th th should be superscript 

L278 104 m3/year, 4 should be superscript

Specific comments

1. Give a paragraph of study area and data 

2. Give location map of the study region

3. give source of data

In section 2.1, give reference where form the equation has been taken

Has the equation been validated through different statistic?

Describe the two values given in table 2, what it implies?

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

I have provided detailed suggestions in the annotated pdf. kindly check and respond to them point by point. Check Section Headings and in between

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper with the subject  has Fuzzy programming based optimal water resources allocation in a watershed: a case study of the Yinma River Basin in Jilin Province, China has an interesting topic and methodology but before be accepted to be published in this journal needs some minor modification.

Specific comment

1. in this stage the results and discussion part is just describing part of the results  without any correlation between the results obtained in this research and other research in the same area or topic. And for that the authors must clearly separate the results part by the discussion part. Also in the discussion part the authors must describe the limitations of the methodology used.

2. The conclusion part is missing completly and were transformed in a summary part. Generally, in the conclusion part, it is recommended to address this section in at least two separate and brief paragraphs the following: i) main findings and novelty of the paper; ii) broader impacts (what others in the field or different fields can do with the findings presented in this work).

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Revisions are acknowledged. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Thanks for incorporating my suggestions. Please revise your study area figure, showing different insets for country and province, that help understand the location of the study area globally.