Assessment and Optimization of Water Resources Regulation for River Networks in the Tidal Plain—A Case Study of the Qingsong Area in Shanghai

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In the context of River and Delta networks, this research could be a great manuscript. Please improve the articles by following the comments below.

1. Please elaborate in your introduction on the significance of river and delta networks and the most striking aspect of this study. I recommend that the authors provide the following references: (a) Sarker et al. (2019), Critical Nodes in River Networks, Scientific Reports. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-47292-4, (b) Gao et al. (2022), Analyzing the critical locations in response of constructed and planned dams on the Mekong River Basin for environmental integrity, Environmental Research Communications, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2515-7620/ac9459. The authors may also take a look at the following studies, (a) Szabo, S., Brondizio, E., Renaud, F.G. et al. Population dynamics, delta vulnerability and environmental change: comparison of the Mekong, Ganges–Brahmaputra and Amazon delta regions. Sustain Sci 11, 539–554 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0372-6, (b) Tejedor, A., A. Longjas, I. Zaliapin, andE. Foufoula-Georgiou (2015), Delta channel networks: 1. A graph-theoretical approach for studying connectivity and steady state transport on deltaic surfaces, Water Resour. Res.,51,3998–4018, doi:10.1002/2014WR016577, etc. 

2. Figures 1 are horrible! I would make quality figures using professional software.

3. Again figures 2 are horrible! I would make quality figures using Python, MATLAB, or whatever other professional software.

4. Please also improve figure 3.

5. Remove all borders from the figures and elaborate on the "hydrodynamic model" you're using. How does it work, including FEM, FVM, and FDM? Possibly use schematic networks to demonstrate how the Saint Venant equations apply to simple networks and how the mass balance is calculated. Please refer to the following citation. Sarker, S. (2022) A Short Review on Computational Hydraulics in the Context of Water Resources Engineering. Open Journal of Modelling and Simulation, 10, 1-31. doi: 10.4236/ojmsi.2022.101001. 

Author Response

Please see reply file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

There are some comments for authors to improve the quality of manuscript as follows:

 

(1) Introduction section can include four key components: motivation, literature survey, contributions, and the organization of paper. Please modify this section accordingly. I would suggest the authors to revise it, with aim to enhance the innovation of your study comparing the previous research works.

 

(2) The literature review is not comprehensive and detailed. Please add some more detailed previous studies to support your developed model. There are many good studies in the related fields, but which have their shortcomings. Please enhance your novelty of developed method. Meanwhile, please update the reference list including the most recent and relevant references. Some useful references are supplied as follows: (a) An inexact joint-probabilistic programming method for risk assessment in water resources allocation. (b) A scenario-based optimization frame to adjust current strategy for population- economy-resource-environment harmony in an urban agglomeration, China. (c) A hybrid land-water-environment model for identification of ecological effect and risk under uncertain meteorological precipitation in an agroforestry ecosystem. (d) A two-stage interval-stochastic water trading model for allocating water resources of Kaidu-kongque river in northwestern China. (e) A mix inexact-quadratic fuzzy water resources management model of floodplain (IQT-WMMF) for regional sustainable development of Dahuangbaowa, China.

 

(3) The structure of this paper is deficit. Please add some expression in the ending of “Introduction” section. Meanwhile, the framework of your developed method or application should be added.

 

(4) The quality of map in Figure 1 is not good enough, which should be revised in a clear manner.

 

(5) In “ Regional Overview” section, the practical problem in study area should be added. Why did the authors develop this model? What practical problems can this model deal with?” There are numbers of analysis methods to deal with this issue effectively, why did author develop such model? All above issues should be added?

(6) What the differences in subfigures in Figure 3, which can not be find the change trends and corresponding differences in current situations.

 

(7) How did the study region divide into different sections? Which are the upstream and downstream? Is there any water gate to regulate water flow? How did the principle of water gate operation?

 

(8) The “Result analysis” should be refined and simplified to protrude some interesting and new results.

 

(9) The language of the paper needs improvement. For example: there are very long sentences in the manuscript that need to be revised. Meanwhile, some of the sentences also have structural issue. Moreover, numbers of grammatical errors exist in the manuscript that needs to be corrected.

 

(10) The “Conclusion” section should be revised to highlight the novelty of this paper. It is expected to include not only general description of the proposed method but also a brief summary of disadvantages of this method and some future study works. It would help the readers better understand the limitation and improvement of the proposed method. 

Author Response

Please see reply file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for the revision. 

Reviewer 2 Report

This version is OK.