Hydraulic Relationship between Hulun Lake and Cretaceous Confined Aquifer Using Hydrochemistry and Isotopic Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The following comments and suggestions are provided to the authors to further improve the quality and impact of their article:

 1- Strengthen the introduction: The introduction can be enhanced by providing a more comprehensive overview of the existing literature on lake-groundwater interactions, hydrogeochemistry, and isotope hydrology. This will help to better contextualize the study and highlight its novelty and significance. Additionally, the authors could provide a clearer statement of the research objectives and hypotheses.

2- Expand the discussion: The discussion section can be expanded to include a more in-depth analysis of the findings and their implications. The authors could discuss the potential mechanisms responsible for the observed hydrochemical and isotopic patterns, and explore the broader significance of the study for understanding lake-groundwater interactions in cold and arid regions.

3- Consider additional analyses: The authors could consider conducting additional analyses to further strengthen their findings. For example, they could perform statistical analyses to test the significance of the observed differences in hydrochemical and isotopic characteristics between different water bodies. Additionally, they could conduct sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of different model parameters on the results of the groundwater age and renewal rate calculations.

4-Improve the clarity of figures and tables: The figures and tables can be improved to make them more visually appealing and easier to understand. The authors could use different colors, symbols, and labels to distinguish between different data points and trends. Additionally, they could provide more detailed captions and explanations to help readers interpret the figures and tables.

5- Proofread for grammar and typos: The article should be carefully proofread to eliminate any grammatical errors or typos. This will improve the overall readability and professionalism of the manuscript.

Additional suggestions:

 The authors could consider adding a section on the limitations of the study and potential directions for future research. This will demonstrate their awareness of the limitations of their work and encourage further investigation in the field.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

（1）The title of the paper shows the relationship between Lake water and Confined water, but the content of the paper also includes Phreatic water. Please adjust the title of the paper to be consistent with the content.

（2）Fix the mistakes, such as HCO₃−Na in line 14 and  HCO₃−Na in line 226 are different; Line in line 347;line 367.

 

(3)In line 222-226, the lake water, Phreatic water and Confined water are HCO₃−Na type, but no data reveals the content of Na⁺ and HCO₃^-. The data in manuscript is HCO₃^-+CO₃^2- and K⁺+Na⁺.

（4）In line 243-245, it is unclear that what are represented by the data in parentheses.

（5）The paper does not provide a clear explanation of the relationship among Lake water, Phreatic water and Confined water, as well as the updated source relationship.

（6）As a large source of groundwater and river water for lake water, why is there no relevant research data in the paper?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper presented a comprehensive analysis of main ions, δD and δ¹⁸O, δ³H, and other environmental tracers and revealed the interaction between lake water and groundwater in Hulun Lake. In my evaluation, this research is carefully designed with strong support of theory. The comparative analysis of hydrochemical composition, stable isotope characteristics and groundwater age and renewal rate determination of lake water, phreatic water and various confined water are thoroughly presented and discussed in the current manuscript. This study improved the understanding of the controlled circulation and hydrochemical evolution of lake groundwater systems in cold and arid regions and is pertinent to the readers of Sustainability. I suggest the authors to clarify the following aspects to further improve the quality of this manuscript:

1.     In line 270, the article says that the “The Phreatic data landing point is located at LMWL” which seems not consistent with Figure 4. Instead, it seems that the landing point of confined water is located at LMWL.

2.     The reason why Phreatic and confined water is weakly affected by atmospheric precipitation seem unclear from the current discussion in section 4.1. The sentence in Line 315 is hard to follow “while Phreatic and Confined water are not directly caused by the recharge of precipitation”.

 

To conclude, I am supportive for its publication on Sustainability after minor revisions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf