Assessment of Water Quality, Eutrophication, and Zooplankton Community in Lake Burullus, Egypt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review for the paper "Assessment of Water Quality, Eutrophication and Zooplankton Community in Lake Burullus, Egypt" by Ahmed E. Alprol and co-authors submitted to "Diversity".

General comment.

The authors studied environmental conditions and zooplankton assemblages in Lake Burullus. They presented calculations of some indices to assess the water quality of the lake. They also found correlations between environmental parameters and zooplankton abundance. They concluded that Lake Burullus has good water quality.

Major concerns.

Methods are not well described. It is unclear how many samples were analyzed by the authors. They stated "that sampling was undertaken seasonally", but only 12 samples at 12 sites were collected. They should clarify this matter and indicate the sampling period (dates). If they studied seasonal aspects they should separate their data according to different seasons.

Discussion is poor. The authors should provide explanations for their results and compare their data for other authors. This is particularly true for the sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5. Such comparison is made in some cases but the novelty of the authors' data remains unclear. Spatial and temporal patterns are not discussed.

The "Conclusions" section is too long.

The English of the manuscript does not meet the required standard of the journal and significant improvements (grammar, syntax, and style) must be made prior to resubmission.

Specific remarks.

Line 61. Consider replacing " Zooplankton is " with " Zooplankton are "

Table 4. WQI and AWQI of Burulles lake water. The authors should avoid abbreviations in the table captions

Lines 159-162 should be in the subsection "Statistical analysis". Also, it should be re-written because in the current form this text is difficult to understand.

Line 127. Consider replacing " desk " with " disk "

Line 109. Consider replacing " 55 m " with " 55 µm "

Line 109-110. Consider replacing "plastic container of  10 liters’ capacity " with "10-L plastic container"

Line 115-116. Consider replacing " quantity  of individuals of every species was enumeration " with "number of individuals of every species was enumerated"

Line 117. Consider replacing " number " with "as number "

Line 121. Consider replacing " Index  is " with "Index  has been "

Line 123. Consider replacing " assessment" with "an assessment"

Line 129. Consider replacing " as following" with "as follows"

Line 143. Consider replacing " to gives " with " to give"

Line 148. Consider replacing " was numerates " with " was calculated "

Line 156. Consider replacing " computes" with " computed"

Line 157. Consider replacing " the equation 7" with " equation"

Line 170. Consider replacing " of (2017–2019), were summarized at Table 2" with " of 2017–2019 are summarized in Table 2"

Table 2 requires a footer to describe the abbreviations.

Table 6. This table should be moved in the Materials and Methods

Table 9. Change " Middel" to " Middle", " Weastern" to " Western"

Lines 478-486. The authors should add relevant citation to support their conclusions.

The Latin names of species should be italicized: Lines 548-549, 552, 558, 562, 565, 568-569, 579, 582, 604, 609, 616-617, 626, 629, 632, 662

Line 592. Check the reference [25]

Line 621. Missing year and other information.

Line 643. Missing journal and other information.

Line 645. Missing journal and other information.

Line 646. Missing journal and other information.

Line 650. Check the reference [52]

Line 657. Missing journal.

Line 658. Check the reference [56]

Line 662. Check the reference [58], missing authors, incorrect year

Line 665. Missing journal and other information.

Line 670. Check the reference [63]

Author Response

We would like to extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to the reviewer. In fact, his comments and guidance added a lot to the research and increased its scientific content. Therefore, the words cannot express their gratitude for the time and effort they put into evaluating this research.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript presented for review concerns the issue of assessment of water quality, eutrophication and zooplankton community in Lake Burullus, Egypt. In the age of world problems with water, this topic is very important. It is known that natural processes as well as human activities lead to the deterioration of water quality. Eutrophication processes (which are considered negative) are progressing faster and faster and require constant monitoring. There are various methods of water quality testing, one of them is the study of zooplankton communities inhabiting a given reservoir. 

Below I provide a detailed note on the manuscript:

Map of the location of the research object. Photos presenting the lake. Map of sampling locations.

In statistical analyzes, I propose to add descriptive statistics.

Tab. 2 - please follow the order of the years. I don't understand why the Authors set the order 2018, 2019, 2017? Specify the units in which the temperature is given - degrees Celsius or maybe Fahrenheit?;-)

Tab. 3 - the order should be changed, first 2017, then 2018 and finally 2019

Line 254 - check the following units: mg / l L-1

Line 280 and the following - metal names are written with a lowercase letter Tab. 4 - check the entry of units in the 1st column

Tab. 6 - please consider introducing colors for individual rows - this will, in my opinion, increase the readability of the table

Please mark (highlight) satistically significant similarities.

The importance of research for international (not only local) recipients should be emphasized. Can the test results be extrapolated to other (similar) reservoirs in the world? Can the research results be used by researchers from different parts of the world, or only locally? 

Did the authors consider checking the degree of eutophication also using other indicators - e.g. plants or macroalgae? 

Author Response

We would like to extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to the reviewer. In fact, his comments and guidance added a lot to the research and increased its scientific content. Therefore, the words cannot express their gratitude for the time and effort they put into evaluating this research.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Second review for the paper "Assessment of Water Quality, Eutrophication and Zooplankton Community in Lake Burullus, Egypt" by Ahmed E. Alprol and co-authors submitted to "Diversity".

The authors have provided revisions and improved the paper but substantial linguistic revisions are still required.

Specific comments.

Line 41. Consider replacing “has reduced” with “has decreased”

Lines 50–54. The sentence “As they receive inputs of freshwater…” should be deleted because it is the same as the following sentence “Coastal  lakes  are  heavily…”

Line 54. Consider replacing “form different” with “from different”

Line 63. Consider replacing “The process eutrophication” with “The process of eutrophication”

Line 71-72. Consider replacing “water column of ocean, seas or fresh water” with “the water column of ocean, seas or freshwater”

Line 73. Consider replacing “because the connect” with “because they connect”

Line 79. Consider replacing “semi encased” with “semi-enclosed”

Line 80-81. Consider replacing “a seriously influence” with “a serious influence”

Line 105. Consider replacing “a depth varies between 0.4 and 2.50 m” with “0.4–2.5 m depth”

Line 105. Consider replacing “lake receives sea water” with “The lake receives seawater”

Line 202. Consider replacing “were  performed  by  primer” with ”was performed  by  Primer”

Line 208. Consider replacing “very critical” with “crucial”

Line 213. Consider replacing “ranging” with “ranged”

Line 221-222. Consider replacing “mean of  the period study of 8.09” with “mean of  8.09”

Line 225. Consider replacing “higher” with “a higher”

Line 227. Consider replacing “which leading” with “which leads”

Line 228. Consider replacing “nature” with “the nature”

Line 231-232. Consider replacing “of alkaline pH (pH > 7.0)” with “alkaline pH was > 7.0”

Line 232. Consider replacing “average of” with “average”

Line 236. Consider replacing “maximum value” with “the maximum value”

Line 237. Consider replacing “year  2017” with “2017”

Line 239. Consider replacing “year  2018” with “2018”

Line 243. Consider replacing “to west” with “to the west”

Line 252-253. Consider replacing “average concentrations of salinity” with “average salinity”

Line 255. Consider replacing “In current study” with “In the current study”

Line 257. Consider replacing “at the station” with “at station”

Line 272. Consider replacing “the station” with “station”

Line 275. Consider replacing “gives” with “give”

Line 286. Consider replacing “lowest was value” with “lowest value was”

Line 307. Consider replacing “three-years” with “three-year”

Line 314. Consider replacing “Nitrate (NO3) considered as” with “Nitrate (NO3) is considered”

Line 317. Consider replacing “highest value” with “the highest value”

Line 321. Consider replacing “the drainage” with “drainages”

Line 323. Consider replacing “values was recorded in the station 5” with “value was recorded in station 5”

Line 334. Consider replacing “highest concentrations” with “the highest concentrations”

Line 341-342. Consider replacing “with high value (60.96 mg L -1 ) at winter season in the station 7 and low value  (2105.77  mg  L -1 )  in  the  station  2  at  summer  season” with “with a high value (60.96 mg L -1 ) in winter in station 7 and a low value  (2105.77  mg  L -1 )  in  summer  in station  2”

Line 345. Consider replacing “feds on nutrients and causes” with “fed on nutrients and cause”

Line 351. Consider replacing “Total averages value of” with “The average value for”

Line 358. Consider replacing “were ranged” with “ranged”

Line 360. Consider replacing “at next” with “in the next”

Line 365. Consider replacing “the station” with “station”

Line 368. Consider replacing “concentration of heavy metals ions” with “concentrations of heavy metal ions”

Line 386. Consider replacing “excessive concentration” with “excessive concentrations”

Line 387. Consider replacing “was high” with “were high”

Line 395. Consider replacing “Copper content in the water of Burullus Lake was ranged” with “copper content in the water of Burullus Lake ranged”

Line 399. Consider replacing “the station” with “station”

Line 406. Consider replacing “at year 2019” with “in 2019”

Line 407. Consider replacing “in lake” with “in the lake”

Line 409. Consider replacing “causes damages” with “may damage”

Line 420. Consider deleting “, which recorded”

Line 422. Consider replacing “annual averages of time of study was” with “annual average was”

Line 424. Consider deleting “, which recorded”

Line 427. Consider deleting “and much other marine life”

Line 430. Consider replacing “that is high concentration in” with “containing a high concentration of”

Line 432. Consider replacing “distribution” with “concentration”

Line 453. Consider replacing “result from” with “result of”

Line 465. Consider replacing “associated to” with “associated with”

Line 467. Consider deleting “results”

Line 466. Consider replacing “seasonal” with “the seasonal”

Line 474. Consider replacing “Zooplankton serves in the evaluation and productivity of the ecosystem since it is” with “Zooplankton serve in the evaluation and productivity of the ecosystem since they are”

Line 475. Consider replacing “essential” with “an essential”

Line 480. Consider replacing “three-years period (2017 to 2019 seasons)” with “three years (2017 to 2019)”

Line 481. Consider replacing “were conducted” with “was conducted”

Line 483-484. Consider replacing “the three years period” with “the study period”

Line 498. Consider replacing “In the 2018 year” with “In 2018”

Line 505. Consider replacing “In 2019 year” with “In 2019”

Line 511-512. Consider deleting “,  which mention 90 species of zooplankton.”

Line 521. Consider deleting “predominant temperature”

Line 523. Consider replacing “is related” with “were related” (twice)

Line 527. Consider replacing “Tables” with “Table”

Line 527-528. Consider replacing “at the middle sector in 2018 to 29 species at” with “in the middle sector in 2018 to 29 species in”

Line 531. Consider replacing “at the eastern sector” with “in the eastern sector”

Line 532. Consider deleting “was found to be”

Line 532. Consider replacing “0.67 in” with “0.67 in the”

Line 542. Consider replacing “in average” with “on average”

Line 542. Consider replacing “including the” with “included”

Line 545. Consider replacing “including” with “included”

Line 549. Consider replacing “a relatively” with “relatively”

Line 550. Consider replacing “in average” with “on average”

Line 550-551. Consider replacing “including the three station 1” with “included station 1”

Line 551. Consider replacing “including six” with “included six”

Line 554. Consider replacing “similar” with “similararity”

Line 558. Consider replacing “including the three” with “included three”

Line 562. Consider replacing “in average” with “on average”

Line 567. Consider replacing “Elshabrawy conclude” with “Elshabrawy [72] concluded”

Line 573. Consider replacing “near of” with “near to”

Line 576. Consider replacing “the 2019 and 2018 years” with “in 2019 and 2018”

Line 578-579. Consider replacing “was showed high mean of zooplankton communities” with “we found high abundance of zooplankton”

Line 579-580. Consider replacing “While in the western sector, the winter season was the highest mean of zooplankton abundance as exposed in Fig. 3 and Table 10.” with “In the western sector, in winter, we registered the highest zooplankton abundance (Fig. 3 and Table 10).”

Line 584. Consider replacing “follow” with “follows”

Line 586. Consider replacing “with” with “and”

Line 590. Consider replacing “with” with “and”

Line 600. Consider deleting “years”

Line 606. Consider deleting “Seasonal mean of”

Line 623. Consider deleting “Seasonal average of”

Line 628. Consider replacing “listed correlation” with “showed correlations”

Line 629. Consider replacing “negative correlation” with “negative correlations”

Line 630. Consider replacing “The variance” with “The variations”

Line 638-639. Consider replacing “,  inverse  relation  with  zooplankton” with “showing an  inverse  relation to zooplankton”

Line 641. Consider replacing “amount  of  nutrient,  salts” with “amounts  of  nutrients and  salts”

Line 644. Consider replacing “(similarity) lakes in the world” with “lakes”

Line 646. Consider replacing “, comparing” with “in comparison”

Line 651. Consider replacing “Lake” with “lake”

Line 652. Consider replacing “suffering” with “is suffering”

Line 656. Consider replacing “in 12 stations” with “at 12 stations”

Line 660. Consider replacing “Lake” with “lake”; “eutrophication level” with “the eutrophication level”

Line 661. Consider replacing “heavy metals” with “heavy metal”

Line 662. Consider replacing “Lake” with “lake”

Line 666. Consider deleting “occurrence”

Line 673. Consider replacing “Lake, removing of” with “lake, removing”

References

Scientific names of species should be italicized:

Lines 709, 713, 723-724, 730, 739, 744-745, 747, 781, 791, 799, 802, 807-808, 824, 826, 844

Line 761, 871. Include article information (Authors, title…)

Line 872. Missing information

Author Response

SUMMARY OF AUTHOR(S) RESPONSE TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS

Manuscript ID: diversity-1222628

Title: Assessment of Water Quality, Eutrophication and Zooplankton Community in Lake Burullus, Egypt

Authors: Ahmed E. Alprol, Ahmed M.M. Heneash, Asgad M. Soliman, Mohamed Ashour, Walaa F. Alsanie, Ahmed Gaber, and Abdallah Tageldein Mansour

We would like to extend our sincere thanks and appreciation to the reviewer. In fact, his comments and guidance added a lot to the research and increased its scientific content. Therefore, the words cannot express their gratitude for their time and effort they put in evaluating this research.