An Improved Groundwater Model Framework for Aquifer Structures of the Quaternary-Formed Sediment Body in the Southernmost Parts of the Mekong Delta, Vietnam

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article is a numerical model case study. The hydrogeology, aquifer structure, parameter, boundary condition, water balance and calibration are reasonable.

Author Response

Thank you for your response.

Reviewer 2 Report

This article investigates the groundwater exploitation in local areas in Vietnam which is of importance to the local audience if the authors properly incorporate the following:

• Start the introduction with a sentence to show the global importance, then move to address the regional then the local issues. This is important to attract more audiences to read and cite your article.
• It is important to address the findings of the recent related publications from the years 2020, 2021 and (2022 if possible) and list the sources in the list of references.
• The last sentence in section 1 is not sufficient to show the scope and objectives of the article. Please elaborate more on this.
•  
• Please use % in addition to absolute values (values with units).  

• Please add a detailed flowchart for the methodology starting with a selection of the case study, data collection, ......, outcomes.
• It is more better to build your calibration on recently observed data (not data that 11 years old).
• The used data are due to 2010 and predictions might contain errors due to the continued increase in the demand. Please extend the prediction to 2020 and 2021 and compare them with the observations.
• Predict the levels and exploitation up to 2030 to help the local community to plan how to achieve the 2030 SDG agenda for water.
• Due to the time limitation, I did not check the availability of the data in the sources (7,9, 30, and 31). If the data are not listed there, then please collect them, get permission to present it your article, and list it in an appendix.
• In the para starts by "The monthly hydraulic heads ..... and ends by "......December 2019", if the data mentioned in this para was not published yet, please get a permission and list it in the paper. At least in an Appendix to allow others to verify the results whenever needed.
• Based on your results and conclusion, could you please add a set of recommendations for future studies, policy planners, decision making and stakeholders?

Author Response

Thank you for your response. Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

An improved groundwater model framework for Aquifer Structures of the Quaternary-Formed Sediment Body in the Southernmost Parts of the Mekong Delta, Vietnam

 

Abstract

 

1. “By using the finite element groundwater model with boundary expansion to the sea, we updated the latest data on hydrogeological profiles, groundwater levels, and exploitation.”

This should be replaced by:

“By using a finite element groundwater model with boundary expansion to the sea, we updated the latest data on hydrogeological profiles, groundwater levels, and exploitation.”

 

 

Introduction

1. The second paragraph is too short and should be expanded or integrated with another paragraph.

“Different natural and human-related stress drivers have led to enormous changes to the hydrogeological process in the MKD.”

 

This paragraph also needs to be better developed or removed

2. These described problems do not exist only in Vietnam. Minderhoud et al. [6] give an overview of several regions with similar problems. Nearly 600 million people are living in such delta areas worldwide [10–12].

 

3.The introduction is too long and needs to be more concise.

 

Study Area

1. This section is adequate.

 

     Methodology

 

1. Where do the authors state the vertical discretization of the finite element grid?
2. Which parameterization method was used for calibration of FEFLOW model? Was FePest used with the zoning approach or were pilot points method used?
3. In FEFLOW a hydraulic conductivity tensor can be used as well, why was the K parameter not considered in tensor form? Is there good reason for just calibrating from horizontal and vertical K?
4. In Figure 6 data for 2014 and 2018 are missing? Were there not measurements for those years?
5. A match between model and data used for calibration should be shown.

Results

Generally well presented. Why didn’t the authors do a sensitivity analysis to see how changes in parameters influence water levels predicted by the model?

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your response. Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is largely improved. Still, I have some minor comments:

1-  In the title of the article, please do not mix sentience style with title style. Stick to only one style.

2- Follow the numbered citation style anywhere in the text and in the figures. Add the number of the source like this: NAWAPI [#]. Please do for all occurrences for this source and others.

3- In the flowchart, Figure 4, replace "Chapter" with "Section" in the flow chapter and in all the text of the article.

4-In section 4.1, do not mix numbered style with (Name, year) citation style. Replace "Minderhoud et al (2017)" with "Minderhoud et. [#]" and do for all occurrences, in the text and figures.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam,

We have addressed all comments, please see below.

The article is largely improved. Still, I have some minor comments:

1. In the title of the article, please do not mix sentience style with title style. Stick to only one style.

Response: Thanks for this recommendation. After the paper is accepted, MDPI will layout the manuscript professionally.

 

2. Follow the numbered citation style anywhere in the text and in the figures. Add the number of the source like this: NAWAPI [#]. Please do for all occurrences for this source and others.

Response: We updated. Thanks

 

3. In the flowchart, Figure 4, replace "Chapter" with "Section" in the flow chapter and in all the text of the article.

Response: Figure 4 has been corrected.

4. In section 4.1, do not mix numbered style with (Name, year) citation style. Replace "Minderhoud et al (2017)" with "Minderhoud et. [#]" and do for all occurrences, in the text and figures.

Response: We updated. Thanks for this recommendation.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have adequately incorporated feedback into their revisions.

Author Response

Thank you for your response