Effects of Farming Activities on the Temporal and Spatial Changes of Hydrogen and Oxygen Isotopes Present in Groundwater in the Hani Rice Terraces, Southwest China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Author(s),

I found your manuscript interesting, but I think for only limited audience. In my opinion the manuscript is well organized and contains all information needed to understand all assumptions, research methods, and the discussion. Conclusions are also clear and well supported by the data obtained from investigations and literature. I have no critical comments to the manuscript beside the technical / editorial ones, especially to the references and citations. These are as follow:

In the title I suggest to add localization information. It might be in brackets at the end of the title, e.g: (Yunnnan province, south of China). This information should be also included into abstract. The title of Table 1 should be more clear, e.g: δ18O and δD of ground water... Line 162: here you should add symbol "-" before 52.11‰ Line 271: here should be referenced Figure 5 instaed of Figure 4. Lines 299-300: The title of Figure 6should be moved to the line 299. Lines 35-36 (as well as line 43): Cited position of Cartwright et al., 2017 is not listed in references, please complete it. Lines 407 and 410: Here should be listed names of all authors. Line 64: Cited paper by Scanlon et al. here is from 2014, and in references it is from 2005; please check it and make proper corrections. Line 66: Instaed of May et al., 2013 here should be Mays, 2013. Line 74: Cited paper by Lin et al., 2016 is not listed in references; please supplement this publication. Line 266: Publication by Dansgaard (1964) is not listed in references; please supplement this publication. References, positions 14 and 15 should be in reverse order, I mean paper by Jiao should be lister first, and then Jiao et al.

In my opinion your manuscript may be accepted for publication in Water after minor revision.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting and well done study. However, some issues are critical and should be considered.

The major weak point of this work is that authors the authors consider groundwater, but the article lacks a description of the hydrogeological conditions of the study area, including the physicochemical characteristics of groundwater. Also, the isotopic composition of groundwater is not compared with GMWL and LMWL lines. This makes the results questionable in total.

Minor issue are the following ones.

Page 4, line 128. You write: "Twelve groundwater sampling points were established and 144 groundwater samples were obtained." But on page Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Page 183 and in the Table 1 you are showing 10 samples.

There is no Table with the characteristics of the samples taken. If these are sources, then their coordinates, aquifer, flow rates are indicated; permanent or temporary sources; physico-chemical characteristics of groundwater. If these are wells, then the depth of sampling is additionally indicated.

Page 4, lines 147-149. You write: "The hydrogeological data of the basin was derived from the field investigation of the study area and the 1: 200,000 regional geological report (geology) of the Yuanyang and Damalufu areas published by the Yunnan Geological Survey Bureau." But in the Section “Study area” you do not reveal the geological and hydrogeological conditions of the study area, although groundwater cannot be considered without knowing the basic characteristics of aquifers and aquicluds (thickness; boundary conditions - unconfined, confined; hydraulic conductivity; lithological composition, etc.).

Fig. 2. Typically, GMWL and LMWL lines are also must be plotted on such graphs and LGWL deviations from these lines are analyzed.

Page 10, lines 303-304. You write: “this study has revealed the variation characteristics and influencing factors of temporal and spatial effects on groundwater.” But the variation characteristics and influencing factors of temporal and spatial effects on groundwater are primarily reflected in the physicochemical characteristics of groundwater (TDS, alkalinity, t °, pH, Eh, O2), which are clearly not enough in the article.

"Ground water" is usually written as "groundwater"

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I believe the manuscript has been significantly improved. However, minor comments must be resolved before the publication in Water.

Minor comments:

Page 3, lines 121-122.

What does the expression mean: "The pore aquifer is the Qualified Design Listing (Qdl)"?

Page 4, line 128.

You write: "Twelve groundwater sampling points were established..." But you showed ten sampling points in Figure 1.

Page 5 193-194

You write: "In the rainy season, δD = 4.89δ18O – 15.79 (R² = 0.90, n = 72); in the dry season, δD = 5.19δ18O – 13.31 (R² = 0.95, n = 72) (Fig. 2)".

But you showed one line in Fig. 2. Explain the reasons of oxygen isotope enrichment.

Fig. 5

Need to show:

1) X-axis (l, km) and Y-axis (H asl, m)

2) Legend (example):

- Pore aquitard,

- Weathering zone of the gneiss and granulite (Fissured aquifer)

- Zone of the gneiss and granulite with undeveloped joints and cracks (Relative aquiclude)

- Basement (No weathering)

You write: (1) We added the coordinates of the samples in Table 1, and described aquifer and flow rates in Line 155-168 and Line 130-131, respectively.

Please check it in Line 155-168.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx