Challenges of Urban Artificial Landscape Water Bodies: Treatment Techniques and Restoration Strategies towards Ecosystem Services Enhancement
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
You need to rewrite the following fragment, making the message clearer
"Popular among them are the air flotation technology, the mixed method, the ultrasonic 126 method and artificial arching, ultrasonic method which have proven potent in combating 127 excessive algae growth. It can successfully avoid secondary pollution by changing the 128 growth of algae caused by nutritional temples. However, the technique is expensive and 129 can only be used to remediate limited quantities of polluted water. This technology alone 130 is deficient addressing eutrophication of water bodies produced by algae outbreaks. It is 131 only suitable for emergency removal due to its limitations"
Author Response
You need to rewrite the following fragment, making the message clearer
"Popular among them are the air flotation technology, the mixed method, the ultrasonic 126 method and artificial arching, ultrasonic method which have proven potent in combating 127 excessive algae growth. It can successfully avoid secondary pollution by changing the 128 growth of algae caused by nutritional temples. However, the technique is expensive and 129 can only be used to remediate limited quantities of polluted water. This technology alone 130 is deficient addressing eutrophication of water bodies produced by algae outbreaks. It is 131 only suitable for emergency removal due to its limitations"
Response: Many thanks for your valuable comment. We review the paragraph and have rewritten it to give a clear meaning.
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript by Addo-Bankas aims to review the different technologies for improving the quality of urban artificial water bodies. The manuscript gathers an interesting list of removal techniques filling a gap in the existing literature. From my point of view, it maybe lacks in some sections a more precise assessment and discussions on the removal effienciency of the proposed strategies. Based on these limitations, I recommend minor modifications on this manuscript. Specific comments are given below,
L32 "has"?
L49 "higher" than what?
L49 "pollutants" in this manuscript you consider sediments, nitrogen, carbon and phosphorus, could you mention other type of relevant contaminants?
L55 "aggravating greenhouse effect" is it really a matter of concern?
L75 "clean water" what is it?
L80-85 please clarify these sentences
L86 and hereafter please be homogeneous in you manuscript by using Yang et al.
L103 "COD" if you mean chemical oxygen demand is it a primary concern through aeration? why not BOD5?
L103 Is there a real removal effect of aeration on TP?
L164 Constructed wetlands -> in this section please be careful to dinstinct the use of constructed wetland for the treatment of wastewater and in the current context. Is there any difference? If not, please clearly state this point.
L205-6 The removal mechanisms presented here and elsewhere in the manuscript are quite general and shared among the proposed strategies. I advise to be more specific on the process, and on the removal efficiency attributed to each technique on each water quality parameter.
L273-275 Why did you not deepen this point in your manuscript?
L279-283 This statement appears a bit too general, could you propose an idea based on your results?
L300-304 This sentence looks like an abstract sentence. Please strenghten your conclusion to clearly hughlight the added-value of your manuscript.
Author Response
This manuscript by Addo-Bankas aims to review the different technologies for improving the quality of urban artificial water bodies. The manuscript gathers an interesting list of removal techniques filling a gap in the existing literature. From my point of view, it maybe lacks in some sections a more precise assessment and discussions on the removal efficiency of the proposed strategies. Based on these limitations, I recommend minor modifications on this manuscript. Specific comments are given below,
L32 "has"?
Response: Many thanks for the fine reading. Grammatical error has been corrected.
L49 "higher" than what?
Response: Many thanks and the grammatical error has been corrected.
L49 "pollutants" in this manuscript you consider sediments, nitrogen, carbon and phosphorus, could you mention other type of relevant contaminants?
Response: Many thanks for the good comment, this give us an opportunity to clarify that indeed there are more relevant contaminants in water bodies apart from those mentioned in the sentence, however, the sentence was specific to mention only those that are the major contributors to eutrophication. We modified the sentence.
L55 "aggravating greenhouse effect" is it really a matter of concern?
Response: Good comment! The sentence has been amended to include more direct consequence.
L75 "clean water" what is it?
Response: Many thanks for it. Clean water in this context was used to indicate any treated water such as tap water with lower pollutant load however for the sake of better clarity, the phrase has been amended to treated water
L80-85 please clarify these sentences
Response: Many thanks for the fine reading. The statements have been amended to provide better clarity.
L86 and hereafter please be homogeneous in your manuscript by using Yang et al.
Response: Many thanks once again. The recommended amendment has been made to this sentence.
L103 "COD" if you mean chemical oxygen demand is it a primary concern through aeration? why not BOD5?
Response: Many thanks for the good comments. Yes, both COD and BOD5 are important parameters for wastewater characteristics. In practice, COD is often preferred compared to BOD5 since COD is fast to monitor. It is often higher than BOD because more organic molecules can be oxidized chemically than biologically including substances hazardous to biological life. We have added BOD5 in the revised text.
L103 Is there a real removal effect of aeration on TP?
Response: Good point, many thanks. Aerobic conditions are very necessary and vital for biological aerobic removal. The impact of oxygen is obvious for BOD5 or COD, nitrification, but it also affects the biological phosphorus removal in theory. We have revised the words in the revised text.
L164 Constructed wetlands -> in this section please be careful to distinct the use of constructed wetland for the treatment of wastewater and in the current context. Is there any difference? If not, please clearly state this point.
Response: Many thanks. There is no difference in the treatment of wastewater and that of ALWs. Constructed wetland is an increasingly used and more popular technique for wastewater treatment in “green” way.
L205-6 The removal mechanisms presented here and elsewhere in the manuscript are quite general and shared among the proposed strategies. I advise to be more specific on the process, and on the removal, efficiency attributed to each technique on each water quality parameter.
Response: Thank you for your good comments and we highly appreciate the point. Regarding the limited words requirement and the nature of a review paper, we plan to focus on the principle description and logical thinking of the techniques, rather than detailed analysis and discussion with data and parameters. Each technique can be accessed from literature searching. Hope you can accept it.
L273-275 Why did you not deepen this point in your manuscript?
Response: There is limited research into the areas mentioned, hence the recommendation has been made in the revised version of the manuscript.
L279-283 This statement appears a bit too general, could you propose an idea based on your results?
Response: The suggested amendment has been made in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.
L300-304 This sentence looks like an abstract sentence. Please strengthen your conclusion to clearly highlight the added-value of your manuscript.
Response: Many thanks. The suggested amendment has been made in a more clarified manner.
Reviewer 3 Report
The review paper is fairly detailed and provides a comprehensive overview of Treatment Techniques and Restoration Strategies for Ecosystem Services Enhancement. I recommend this review paper for publication.
Author Response
The review paper is fairly detailed and provides a comprehensive overview of Treatment Techniques and Restoration Strategies for Ecosystem Services Enhancement. I recommend this review paper for publication.
Response: Many thanks for the good word and thank you very much.
