Dear Dr. Tefera,

Methods and choice of two focal individuals to generalize the behavior are of major concern of common hippos in the DWS. For this, statistical methods need to be clear.

Sweeping conclusions on the community aspects, which are not part of the study, may be removed.

Classification of behaviors within the context of the study and whether the statistical analysis of the feeding ecology included the faecal samples or only the feeding observations, needs clarification.

Certain parts of the manuscript need to be rewritten to address grammar and syntax where the text is difficult to understand.

Point wise suggestions and comments by the reviewers need to be addressed for manuscript improvements.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 17 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Munir Ahmad, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.-->--> -->-->Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at -->-->https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and -->-->https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf-->--> -->-->2. We note that Figure S1 includes an image of a participant in the study. -->-->As per the PLOS ONE policy (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-human-subjects-research) on papers that include identifying, or potentially identifying, information, the individual(s) or parent(s)/guardian(s) must be informed of the terms of the PLOS open-access (CC-BY) license and provide specific permission for publication of these details under the terms of this license. Please download the Consent Form for Publication in a PLOS Journal (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=8ce6/plos-consent-form-english.pdf). The signed consent form should not be submitted with the manuscript, but should be securely filed in the individual's case notes. Please amend the methods section and ethics statement of the manuscript to explicitly state that the patient/participant has provided consent for publication: “The individual in this manuscript has given written informed consent (as outlined in PLOS consent form) to publish these case details”. -->--> -->-->If you are unable to obtain consent from the subject of the photograph, you will need to remove the figure and any other textual identifying information or case descriptions for this individual.-->--> -->-->3. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.-->--> -->-->4. We note that you have referenced Timbuka, C. D. which has currently not yet been accepted for publication. Please remove this from your References and amend this to state in the body of your manuscript: (Timbuka, C. D. [Submitted]) as detailed online in our guide for authors-->-->http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-reference-style-->--> -->-->5. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.-->--> -->-->We require you to either present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or remove the figures from your submission:-->--> -->-->a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.  -->--> -->-->We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:-->-->“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”-->--> -->-->Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.-->--> -->-->In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”-->--> -->-->b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.-->-->The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:-->--> -->-->USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/-->-->The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/-->-->Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html-->-->NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/-->-->Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/-->-->USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#-->-->Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/-->?>

Additional Editor Comments:

Methods and choice of two focal individuals to generalize the behavior are of major concern of common hippos in the DWS. For this, statistical methods need to be clear.

Sweeping conclusions on the community aspects, which are not part of the study, may be removed.

Classification of behaviors within the context of the study and whether the statistical analysis of the feeding ecology included the faecal samples or only the feeding observations, needs clarification.

Certain parts of the manuscript need to be rewritten to address grammar and syntax where the text is difficult to understand.

Point wise suggestions and comments by the reviewers need to be addressed for manuscript improvements.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1:  I have made a series of annotations on the pdf attached. My concern is on your methods and choice two focal individuals to generalize the behavior of common hippos in the DWS. Be clear on the statistical methods you used. You made sweeping conclusions on the community aspects which are not part of the study remove them. There is scope for improvement for this manuscript.

Reviewer #2:  General comments

This is an interesting and worthwhile study focusing on an often-overlooked megaherbivore, the common hippopotamus. The manuscript provides a comprehensive account of the feeding and activity habits for hippos in the Sanctuary, which could have important future conservation management implications. Overall, the study is well-structured, and the methodology is robust. However, the manuscript would benefit from some further clarification regarding the classification of behaviours within the context of the study and whether the statistical analysis of the feeding ecology included the faecal samples or only the feeding observations. Certain parts of the manuscript also need to be rewritten to address grammar and syntax where the text is difficult to understand and to improve overall readability. There is a repeated paragraph in the discussion that needs to be addressed. Please see further detailed feedback below.

Detailed feedback

Line 69- unclear on what ‘dimensions’ means here, consider rephrasing for clarity

Line 77- add reference here

Line 84- what were the ‘intended purposes’ of the formation of DWS? Also, suggest providing the full name here of DWS as done in abstract

Line 98- remove ‘were’

Line 115- ‘primarily growing’ as in Hyparrhenia spp. are dominant? Or perennially? Maybe clarify

Lines 127-132- the addition of ‘actions’ and ‘occurrences’ is confusing, stick to ‘activities’ and ‘events’ as per the analysis

Lines 131-132- state why this distinction was made and what was considered a short period of time vs a long period of time

Line 129 + 177-178- what types of behaviours were placed in the ‘socialisation’ category? Also specify the behaviours considered ‘mating behaviours’ and how these differ from yawning and barking (as mentioned in the discussion on line 296)

Line 198-199- what about behavioural events as per your definitions?

Line 218-219- suggest rephrasing ‘feeding bites’ for clarity as unclear what this means

Line 239- suggest remove ‘importantly’

Line 238-242- does this statistical test include the faecal samples between the wet and dry seasons as well as the observations? If not, the manuscript would benefit from an additional statistical test of the faecal samples to determine whether the observed differences between the seasons were statistically significant

Lines 256-279- repeated paragraph, suggest remove the second one as lines 277-279 are incomprehensible

Line 283- add references to support these statements, no analysis in this study was undertaken to conclude that these variables significantly altered the activity patterns

Lines 332-336- suggest rephrasing ‘almost all’ since the removal of 12 species out of a total of 34 is a significant amount

Lines 345-346- given the consistency of the results with earlier studies in Ethiopia, how could the outcome of the research contribute to the management of other areas with hippo populations?

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy

Reviewer #1: Yes:  Beaven Utete

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachments

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-24-55622_reviewer Hippopaper.pdf

Feeding ecology and activity patterns of Hippopotamus amphibious in the Dhidhessa Wildlife Sanctuary, Southwestern Ethiopia

PONE-D-24-55622R1

Dear Dr. Tefera,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Munir Ahmad, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: