Estimation of the Spring Tide Bedload Transport at the Eastern Entrance of the Qiongzhou Strait
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper aims to study the bedload transport at the east entrance of Qiongzhou Strait with field measurements of water level and current and the distribution of sediment, facilitated with the numerical model SCHISM to estimate the spatial distribution of bedload transport. Both the estimated bedload transport rate at the observational stations and the fact that the sediment gets finer from west to east indicate strong transport process occurring in this region. The numerical model shows the bedload transport is westward in the north but eastward in the south. Topics is important and interesting to readers. The paper can be improved by considering the following points:
1. Describe what is resolution of the bathymetric data for model simulation? the model grid is as small as 200 m.
2. Add brief description of SCHISM model
3. Discuss wave-tide-current interaction and potential wave contribution to current and sediment transport (cf. Zou, Q., & Xie, D. (2016). Tide-surge and wave interaction in the Gulf of Maine during an extratropical storm. Ocean Dynamics, 66(12), 1715-1732. and Xie, D., Zou, Q., & Cannon, J. W. (2016). Application of SWAN+ADCIRC to tide-surge and wave simulation in Gulf of Maine during Patriot's Day storm. Water Science and Engineering, 9(1), 33-41.)
4. highlight the new findings compared with existing literature
5. The language needs to be thoroughly checked and improved, for example, line 85, what does it mean locally encrypted? also “filed”
6. quality and resolution of figures need to be improved. some figures are not eligible.fpr example, figure 7 and 8
7. fig 5 (right) has Chinese in one of the legend , which should be changed. also figure captions need to be enhanced since almost all figure captions has only one sentence.
8. It helps to add a comparison of current and bedload transport between model results and observations
9. It would be very relevant to the present objective to add a figure showing the vector field of the net bedload transport from numerical model. This also helps to support the findings of the transport pattern.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This was a manuscript about estimating the bedload transport of the Qiongzhou Strait. The paper would have benefited from a thorough review before submission, particularly for grammar. Below are some comments to improve the manuscript.
Major Comments:
· The title correctly notes that only bed-load is considered, but Line 75 notes some area are “almost silty”. This would indicate suspended load should also be accounted for in the transport calculations.
· The introduction describes the site, but there’s no explanation why the study is novel or useful. The conclusions would also benefit from highlighting the importance of the study too.
· Random words are capitalized and capitalizations are inconsistent throughout the manuscript.
Minor Comments:
· Abstract, P1, L17: Define any acronym the first time it is used.
· Abstract, P1, L22: Why is Southwest Shoal capitalized?
· P1, L35: Be consistent about when you use “sand ridge” and when you use “shoal”. They seem to be used interchangeably in the manuscript.
· P1, L39: …found to “be” related…
· P2, L47: Delete “in place”
· P2, L68-69: “large thickness of sediment” - what else would the bottom be? Bedrock? I do not understand the point trying to be made.
· P2, L75: Change “almost silty” to “fine sand” unless it really is silt.
· P2, L97: Change “H” to “h” to be consistent with the rest of the manuscript.
· P3, L124: I don’t understand the format of Equation 2. What is the relationship between U_{z} and Ubar?
· P4, L150-151: The average clay content is 3.9% and the minimum is less than 4%. Please double check your numbers. If the average is 3.9%, of course the minimum would be less than 4%.
· P8, Table 1: It is very difficult read what numbers are affiliated with each statistical scope. Could this be formatted differently to make it clearer?
· P9, L266-303: This reads almost like these are measured sediment fluxes. Please clarify that this is the measurements are the modeled values and not measured.
· P11, L305: Hydrodynamic is one word.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for improving this manuscript and addressing the previously made comments. A “track-changes” version of the improved manuscript would have been useful to see all the changes. That is not your fault. I will request the editor to include that in the future. Below are a few very minor comments for your consideration.
- - Keyword: Grain size is two words
- - Equations 1-5: Align the equation numbers
- - Figure 5: The axis font size is difficult to read and the resolution is poor.
- - Figure 7: The legend is too small to read and most of the text in the figure cannot be read.
- - Figure 8: Same comment as Figure 7.
- - Table 1: I recommend changing statistical scope to location, or just leave it off.
- - Figure 10: The legend is difficult to read and the tide level is very faded.
Author Response
- Keyword: Grain size is two words
Response: revised.
- Equations 1-5: Align the equation numbers
Response: revised as suggested.
- Figure 5: The axis font size is difficult to read and the resolution is poor.
Response: Figure 5 is replaced with higher resolution version.
- Figure 7: The legend is too small to read and most of the text in the figure cannot be read.
Response: Figure 7 is revised to address your concerns.
- Figure 8: Same comment as Figure 7.
Response: Figure 8 is revised.
- Table 1: I recommend changing statistical scope to location, or just leave it off.
Response：revised.
- Figure 10: The legend is difficult to read and the tide level is very faded.
Response: we revised Figure 10 legend and the tide level line.
