Distributional Changes in Fishery Resource Diversity Caused by Typhoon Pathways in the East/Japan Sea
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an interesting study investigating an important topic – how do major storms influence marine ecosystems, in the context of fisheries. I appreciate that the authors examined Sea Surface Temperatures, Chlorophyll a, Ekman Pumping Velocity, Mixed Layer Depth, and Fisheries Catch.
I think that a little more detail should be included on the “Fisheries Catch” in the Methods.
What type of fishery and what gear is being used?
Were the catch/diversity metrics standardized for differences in fishing effort? This seems important because, all other things being equal, the more fishing that occurs, the more species will be caught and the greater the amount of total catch.
Additionally, the authors may wish to compare the changes in fishing catch/species/diversity that occur before and after a typhoon to similar periods of time where no such storms occur. It would be helpful for the readers to know the “background” level of differences in fisheries harvests that occur. This paper shows that fisheries metrics differ before and after the passage of a typhoon, but does this difference exceed the variability you would otherwise expect to see during these times of year? This can be difficult to show without additional analysis.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
We sincerely appreciate the valuable opinions of the reviewer to improve the completeness of the paper. The response to the opinion is as follows, and the revised part is indicated in the text.
Point 1: I think that a little more detail should be included on the “Fisheries Catch” in the Methods.
Response 1: Data and methods were modified as follows.
“The fisheries catch data used in this study is the daily catch by area (0.5°) provided by the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives (NFFC, Korea). The data period is 2011-2020. This data is the total catch data not classified by type of fishery and fishing gear. In addition, since data on fishing efforts, such as the number of fishing ships and data classified into fishery and fishing gear types, are only available after 2018 (2019-2020), total catch data were used in this study. Although it is a short period, the changing trend is similar due to comparing the changing pattern of the catch per unit effort and the total catch over the past two years (Figures A6- A7).” The changes are indicated in the text (page 5, lines 175-183 and page 26 Figures A6- A7).
Point 2: What type of fishery and what gear is being used?
Response 2: The catch used in this study is the total catch by fish species. Therefore, the data were not classified by fishery and fishing gear types. According to the NFFC, pelagic and demersal species are data collected through gill net, and mollusks species, such as squid, are collected through gill net and jigging. In addition, red snow crabs are collected through gill net and trap fishing. The fishery and fishing gear information provided by NFFC is presented in Table A3.
Point 3. Were the catch/diversity metrics standardized for differences in fishing effort? This seems important because, all other things being equal, the more fishing that occurs, the more species will be caught and the greater the amount of total catch.
Response 3: It is the same as the answer to Point 1.
Point 4: Additionally, the authors may wish to compare the changes in fishing catch/species/diversity that occur before and after a typhoon to similar periods of time where no such storms occur. It would be helpful for the readers to know the “background” level of differences in fisheries harvests that occur. This paper shows that fisheries metrics differ before and after the passage of a typhoon, but does this difference exceed the variability you would otherwise expect to see during these times of year? This can be difficult to show without additional analysis.
Response 4: The number of species, total catch, and diversity distribution in the period when typhoons did not pass (non-typhoon period) were compared with the period when typhoons passed (Figures A2-A5) using long-term mean fishery conditions over the past five years (2016-2020). Figures 7-10 represent the distribution of fishery before and after typhoons, KONGREY (2018), DANAS (2013), HALONG (2014), and HEISHEN (2020), and Figures A2-A5 represent the distribution of long-term mean fishery at the same time as typhoons period. As a result, the passage of typhoons affects changes in the fishery environment. The revised contents are indicated on (page 12, lines 299-303, lines 322-327), (page 13, lines 342-346, lines 361-365), and (pages 22-25, Figures A2-A5).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This is an interesting and useful paper. I have just a few comments to hopefully improve it.
1. More explanation in the headings/legends of the tables and figures is needed. It took me a while with the tables, but I eventually figured out what I was reading - it would be of great benefit to the readers to clearly spell out the abbreviations and explain the tables and figures (what do the different colors mean?).
2. Much of the discussion reads like results. I would like to see more comparing/contrasting with the literature - how do the results compare with those from other similar studies?
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
We sincerely appreciate the valuable opinions of the reviewer to improve the completeness of the paper. The response to the opinion is as follows, and the revised part is indicated in the text.
Point 1: More explanation in the headings/legends of the tables and figures is needed. It took me a while with the tables, but I eventually figured out what I was reading - it would be of great benefit to the readers to clearly spell out the abbreviations and explain the tables and figures (what do the different colors mean?).
Response 1. Descriptions of abbreviations in Tables 2, 3, and 4 were added, and descriptions of Figures 3-10 (figure title, legend, and unit) were added. It was modified on pages 6-11, 13-17, and 27-30.
Point 2: Much of the discussion reads like results. I would like to see more comparing/contrasting with the literature - how do the results compare with those from other similar studies?
Response 2: The results of this paper were revised to compare them with those of other similar studies. The changes are indicated in the text (page 18, lines 440-441), and (page 19 lines 524-531).
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Many thanks for addressing each of the comments that I raised and for presenting a new analysis including comparisons to the long-term mean (2016-2020) and the explanation of fisheries included in the analysis, and CPUE.
I did not review for the quality of English. This is something that I expect that the editors will need to spend time on the authors with.
