Black Sea Eutrophication Comparative Analysis of Intensity between Coastal and Offshore Waters

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

These are major revision required for article to be published.

Discussion of the potential challenges and limitations of the proposed solutions is missing

Comments of the reviewer

1.      The abstract should is poorly written and must be revised on the basis of what has been done and what’s new in this research?

2.     Why Sampling stations in the Romanian Black Sea coastal waters were chosen specifically?

3.     Provide more context on the specific sources of nutrient inputs that cause eutrophication in both coastal and offshore waters of the Black Sea

4.     More discussion of the potential interactions and feedback loops between these variables would improve our understanding of eutrophication dynamics in the Black Sea. Exploring how changes in one aspect affect others can provide more insight into how ecosystems respond to eutrophication.

5.     Consider elaborating on the methodologies used for water quality assessments, nutrient profiling, and ecological surveys to ensure the results are transparent and reproducible.

6.     Providing information on sampling protocols, analytical techniques, and quality control measures can increase the credibility of the findings and make comparisons with other studies easier.

7.     It would be useful to consider the potential socioeconomic effects of eutrophication on coastal communities and industries in the Black Sea region. This could include effects on fisheries, tourism, human health, and ecosystem services, emphasizing the importance of long-term management strategies for mitigating these effects.

8.     Discuss the feasibility and practicality of putting such measures into action. The consideration of socioeconomic factors, stakeholder engagement, policy frameworks, and technological innovations can provide insights into the challenges and opportunities associated with achieving these goals in the Black Sea region.

9.      Figure 4 needs more explanation

10.   Mention the error in Fig. 6 while fitting the curve

11.   Line 552, Figure 7, discuss the outliers and provide reason?

12.   Figure 15 needs to be replaced with better quality picture.

13.   Conclusion sections need to be more precise and short..

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewers and Academic editors,

Thank you for all your insightful comments on our manuscript " Black Sea Eutrophication Comparative Analysis of Intensity Between Coastal and Offshore Waters ".

We believe that your evaluation and comments have enhanced the quality of our work. We have diligently tried to address the concerns and suggestions you raised. The revised manuscript reflects several significant changes based on the received feedback. Here is a brief overview of the modifications made:

Clarifications and Expansions: We have included additional explanations and elaborated on specific concepts to ensure better clarity and understanding of the presented material.

Abstract: We have written the new abstract with concrete results as one of the reviewers recommended.

Methodology and Analysis: Several sections have been revised to provide more comprehensive details about the methods and analytical approaches.

Results and Discussion: We have restructured the results section to offer a more cohesive presentation of our findings. Additionally, we have revised the discussion to better align with the results and address the raised queries more explicitly.

Citations and References: We have reviewed and updated the reference list following the provided guidelines, ensuring accuracy and relevance to the content.

Language and Presentation: Efforts have been made to improve the overall language, including grammar, sentence structure, and terminology, to enhance readability and coherence.

We strongly believe these changes have significantly strengthened the manuscript, making it more robust and informative. You can view it in detail in the tables below for easy reference.

Once again, we express our sincere gratitude for your time and expertise in evaluating our work. We remain committed to upholding the highest standards of academic rigour and welcome any further feedback or suggestions you may have.

Thank you for your continued support and consideration.

 

Kind regards,

Luminita Lazar

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This work discusses the black sea eutrophication. The work is interesting and will definitely appeal to the audience of the journal, Sustainability. Can the authors state how this work differs from existing studies, novelty...

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. How does the spatial variability of eutrophication differ between coastal and offshore waters in the Black Sea, and what are the primary factors driving these differences?

2. What are the main sources of nutrient loading contributing to eutrophication in the Black Sea's coastal and offshore regions, and how do these sources vary spatially and temporally?

3. What are the specific ecological consequences of eutrophication in the Black Sea, particularly in terms of biodiversity patterns, algal proliferation, and water transparency?

4. How were the reduction targets for dissolved inorganic phosphorus (DIP) and inorganic nitrogen (DIN) determined, and what are the scientific and methodological bases for these specific percentage reductions?

6. What is the role of interannual variability in the observed eutrophication patterns, and how do the years 2020-2022 compare to historical data in terms of eutrophication trends?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Acceptable for publication now.