Mongolian Freshwater Ecosystems Under Climate Change and Anthropogenic Pressure: A Case Study of Ugii Lake

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

• Line 2: The title needs to be modified by putting the word freshwater instead of the word grassland
• In general, you should refer to the figures within the sections of the manuscript.
• line 18 of the abstract: "The main results indicate a 13.5% decrease in the lake's surface area between 1986 and 2018, which is associated with ....:.: Is this a study finding? Because the summary should present the results of the current study, not previous studies.
• The abstract needs to be rewritten, as it does not include the results of the water quality assessment or the chemical element analysis included in the manuscript.
• The results obtained in the study should be clearly stated in the abstract, as it gives the reader a first glimpse into the problem and the results obtained.
• At the Introduction: Are there no previous studies conducted on the lake regarding water quality assessment and land use changes?
• line 134, at study area: you should refer to Figure No. 1 in the first section
• It would be better if a more illustrative map of the study area was made with longitude and latitude data
• What is the time period during which the samples were collected?
• The map has 14 sampling points and the results shown are for only 12 points. Why?
•  Why does point 11 have the lowest temperature even though it is outside the surface of the lake? What is the reason?
• As shown in Figure No. 1, the points from which samples were collected are distributed on the borders of the lake, and there are no points representing the interior of the lake, why?
• There is some missed information, such as the area of the lake?
• What rivers and tributaries feed the lake?
• What is the importance of this lake and its contribution to fish production and economy in Mongolia?
• What is the importance of this lake and how does it compare to other lakes in Mongolia?
•  line 144: According to previous studies, the decrease in the area of the lake was estimated between the period from 1986 to 2018 - so why was the decrease not estimated until 2024 so that there is an addition to the work on previous studies. 
• In many places in the manuscript, the increase in temperature and the increase in evaporation in the lake were mentioned, but there are no percentages of the amount of increase or the rate of increase.
• why the seasonal changes have not been studied? Temperature and evaporation rates on the lake?
• in line 344: "Ten years ago, 36.4% of participants rated the environmental conditions as...":  Are these the results of the current study or the results of an older one? You should clarify this.
• line 478:  In the discussion, you should interpret the results obtained in the manuscript and compare them to previous studies on the lake to properly assess the lake's environmental status.

• Have the levels of heavy metals in the lake increased? or Not?

• the safe limit levels for these elements should be indicated and compared with the study results.

• line 492: edit the lake name  "Ugii Nuur" or is this another one?
• The line 528:  indicates an increase in the incidence of some respiratory diseases associated with environmental degradation in the lake. Has an increase in human and industrial activities been observed in the study area?
• Also, has air quality in the study area or the concentrations of some pollutants like NOx or SO2 in the area been studied?

Author Response

We sincerely thank you for your thorough and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the opportunity to improve our paper.
Please see the attachment. We respond point-by-point to each comment and describe the revisions made, which are marked using Track Changes in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations on your work!! This paper discussed the changes in hydrology and ecosystems in Ugii Lake under climate and human pressures. Even though it is well structured, some improvements are required before acceptance. Therefore, my decision is “Major Revision”.

 

Comments:

1. Many citations are missing in the introduction. For example, Lines 36-39. For this kind of statement, you need a reference. There are many more, therefore, add the correct references.
2. Line 42-43: what are those regions? And reference is also missing.
3. Cross-referencing for each figure and table in the main text is missing in the entire manuscript. 
4. For water quality data, it is not mentioned the timing and duration of the measurements.
5. Figure 1: Add the Mongolia and location of the Ugii Lake in the country. Add lat long, north arrow, scale bar. Then zoom into the sampling locations. Make a standard figure.
6. In the Methodology, there is not at least one reference.
7. If two plots are in one Figure, please refer to the Journal’s guidelines for naming each plot. For example, in Figure 2, the left plot should be (a) and the right plot should be (b). Also, it should be reflected in the caption.
8. For any box plots, mention which values are presented in the box, what is the middle line, what is the extended line, and outlier dots in each box in your figure caption.
9. For all figures in water quality assessment, try to plot information starting from one location to end clockwise or anti-clockwise direction based on Figure 1. Otherwise, it is hard to see any connections of locations of the sampling locations.
10. Figure 6: it is not possible to see the variations because of the outliers. Please check those and give the reasons.
11. Section 2.2.3. Add the sample questions used in the survey as Supplementary material.
12. Line 306: Water type and time change????
13. Figure 8: Locations are mismatched with Figure 1. Check the correct latitude and longitude.
14. Figure 9: The number of sites is an integer.
15. Figure 11: Mention in the caption what these error bars are in each box.
16. Discussion: separate the discussion for climate change pressures and anthropogenic pressures.
17. Line 557-560: How do you conclude such without analyzing rainfall data? Revisit the conclusion.
18. Pay attention to the language, formatting of each figure, and numbering.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In my opinion, English editing is required.  

Author Response

We sincerely thank you for your thorough and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the opportunity to improve our paper.
Please see the attachment. We respond point-by-point to each comment and describe the revisions made, which are marked using Track Changes in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for responding to the comments on the manuscript.

Author Response

We sincerely appreciate the reviewers’ time and effort. We believe these revisions substantially improve the clarity, completeness, and impact of the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have not addressed all the comments raised. There are some unprofessional answers. ex. Figure 9, Comment #13, you have just cropped the y-axis and added numbers manually. I'll not review the revised version until you resubmit the completed revision. 

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers,

We apologize for the insufficient revisions and responses to the peer review comments. We have checked again and submit the revised manuscript and responses. We apologize for the inconvenience and thank you for your consideration.

 

Reviewer 2 Comments

The authors have not addressed all the comments raised. There are some unprofessional answers. ex. Figure 9, Comment #13, you have just cropped the y-axis and added numbers manually. I'll not review the revised version until you resubmit the completed revision.

1. Many citations are missing in the introduction. For example, Lines 36-39. For this kind of statement, you need a reference. There are many more, therefore, add the correct references.

• We have reviewed and added references throughout including Lines 36-39.

2. Line 42-43: what are those regions? And reference is also missing.

• We have revised the sentence as semi-arid and arid regions, where rainfall has decreased, and evaporation has increased with the reference.

3. Cross-referencing for each figure and table in the main text is missing in the entire manuscript.

• We have carefully checked and added cross-reference for each figure and table in the main text in the entire manuscript.

4. For water quality data, it is not mentioned the timing and duration of the measurements.

• We have added the timing and duration of measurements on water quality data in the section 2.2.

5. Figure 1: Add the Mongolia and location of the Ugii Lake in the country. Add lat long, north arrow, scale bar. Then zoom into the sampling locations. Make a standard figure.

• Figure 1 has been modified according to the comments.

6. In the Methodology, there is not at least one reference.

• Standard measurement protocols for each indicator have been mentioned in Table.

7. If two plots are in one Figure, please refer to the Journal’s guidelines for naming each plot. For example, in Figure 2, the left plot should be (a) and the right plot should be (b). Also, it should be reflected in the caption.

• The figures have been modified as suggested.

8. For any box plots, mention which values are presented in the box, what is the middle line, what is the extended line, and outlier dots in each box in your figure caption.

• The figure captions have been modified as suggested.

9. For all figures in water quality assessment, try to plot information starting from one location to end clockwise or anticlockwise direction based on Figure 1. Otherwise, it is hard to see any connections of locations of the sampling locations.

• Figure 1 was revised as suggested.

10. Figure 6: it is not possible to see the variations because of the outliers. Please check those and give the reasons.

• We have explained as “Outliers in turbidity may indicate episodic events such as storms, runoff, or increased biological activity.”

11. Section 2.2.3. Add the sample questions used in the survey as Supplementary material.

• We could attach a Mongolian questionnaire as supplementary material and added Data Availability Statement.

12. Line 306: Water type and time change????

•  

13. Figure 8: Locations are mismatched with Figure 1. Check the correct latitude and longitude.

• Figure1 has been revised accordingly.

14. Figure 9: The number of sites is an integer.

• Figure 9 has been revised accordingly.

15. Figure 11: Mention in the caption what these error bars are in each box.

• Explanation has been added in the caption.

16. Discussion: separate the discussion for climate change pressures and anthropogenic pressures.

• Revised the discussion with the references.

17. Line 557-560: How do you conclude such without analyzing rainfall data? Revisit the conclusion.

• Although this study did not involve long-term observation or analysis of precipitation, we concluded our study including references from previous studies mentioned in the introduction.

18. Pay attention to the language, formatting of each figure, and numbering.

• We carefully checked and made corrections to the manuscript.

We sincerely appreciate the reviewers’ time and effort. We believe these revisions substantially improve the clarity, completeness, and impact of the manuscript.

Sincerely,
Corresponding author,
Kikuko Shoyama, Ph. D
Associate Professor, College of Agriculture, Ibaraki University

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments:

1. Pay attention to the Headings. Ex. In the Discussion section
2. Lines 588-591: If this hydrological variability is based on the literature, you should show the comprehensive review results in the Results chapter. Otherwise, you can’t make such a conclusion. The introduction is the background of the study.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Need a grammar check

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf