Mountain Graticules: Bridging Latitude, Longitude, Altitude, and Historicity to Biocultural Heritage

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The work of Sarmiento et al. it is a master piece in the montology science, it really deserves to be published. I only has some slight corrections to be made in order only to improve the manuscript.

I indicate as following:

1. Line 89: An important way to promote mountains preservation is a good geomorphological mapping, there is a recent paper dealing with this topic, please check and add:

Mapping Mountain Landforms and Its Dynamics: Study Cases in Tropical Environments. Applied Sciences, 12(21), 10843.

2. Figure 1: Very nice figure, perhaps you can improve its quality and resolution in an original and new figure

3. Lines 144-146: Moreover, you can add a map dealing with main mountain systems worldwide, and areas over 1000 m asl

4. Figure 2: improve figure quality and resolution, it is blurry

All the best.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

I really appreciate the effort placed into reviewing our article. Your comments have been considered in their entirety and we have incorporated the suggested changes.  We hope you like this new version that is a lot better thanks to your professionalism.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

I’ve read your manuscript with great interest. It is very inspiring and potentially influential. Your reasons and logic are very clear. I’m sure such theoretical contributions move modern geography forward. I really like your contribution and specify below several recommendations of how it would be brought fully in order. Some changes and additions seem to be really necessary.

1)      In Introduction, please, state your objective very clearly.

2)      Subsection 1.1 should become Section 2 “Theoretical Background”. There, you have to specify the basic definition(s) of biocultural heritage. Definitions of the related terms can also be provided. This information can be summarized in a new table.

3)      Materials and Methods: please, provide with more details. Please, relate materials and methods to the subsections (i.e., parts of analysis) of Results. I expect significant extension of this section.

4)      Subsection 3.1.2: does “gender” essence of the mountains depend on their cultural (traditional) or linguistic treatment? For instance, in Russian the majority of mountains are “she” simply because the word “mountain” itself is female in this language.  Please, provide brief explanations.

5)      This paper needs section “Conclusions”, where the 5-7 principal findings (from Results) and interpretations (from Discussion) will be listed in a clear form. This section should also outline theoretical and practical implications. The limitations, biases, and the related perspectives for future research should be stated there too.

6)      Fig. 1: please, make the text labels beneath of all drawings bigger – it’s impossible to read them. Additionally, check the name of the Nepal’s and Ecuador’s mountains.

7)      Table 2: it’d be good to cite the principal work of each of these specialists. The countries should not be abbreviated.

8)      As you use some notable Japanese ideas, I encourage to compose any figure where these ideas will be given also in Japanese – in kana and/or kanji.

9)      References: I’m sure you have to cite more articles published in top international journals in the 2020s. Please, make 10–15 or more additions.

10)  Again: the writing is clear, but, please, double-check ALL geographical names mentioned in this paper, as well as exact heights of the mountains.

Good luck with revisions!

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

First of all, we want to thank you for the professionalism demonstrated in reviewing this article. We have considered all your recommendations and suggested changes, not only on the marginalia with comments but also in the redrawing of graphs, the inclusion of references, shifting of headings, and more completed sentences.  Again, we hope you are satisfied with our effort as we consider that our manuscript has gained from your expert opinion.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx