Hydrochemical and Isotopic Explanations of the Interaction between Surface Water and Groundwater in a Typical-Desertified Steppe of Northern China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

The results of your study are of applied interest.

Major comments:

1. In the Introduction, it is necessary to clearly state the novelty of your research. Is it methodological, territorial (for the first time for China or the study area) or something else?

2. I strongly encourage to describe the limitations and uncertainties of the study. Be more critical of your findings! It is advisable to do this in a separate (sub)section of the manuscript.

3.  In the Discussion section, it is necessary to consider the obtained results in the international aspect. Did no one before you get similar or close results, including the territory of China? How do they compare to your results?

4. Are there any point sources of water consumption and disposal along the rivers of the studied river basin, which could affect the resulting spatial ratio of the hydrochemical and isotopic composition of surface and ground water? In any case, indicate this information in the text of the manuscript, regardless of the positive or negative answer to this question.

5. It is necessary to further emphasize in the manuscript the significance of your findings for the sustainable development of the study region (not just the studied river basin).

Minor comments:

(a) Table 1. In the heading of the columns, instead of SW and SW, there should be SW and GW.

(b) In Figure 6, instead of R, there should be R^2.

Some improvement in English is needed.

Author Response

The responses are listed in the PDF.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have analyzed the relations between groundwater and surface water in a basin of Inner Mongolia (China). The topic is interesting, although the study is not particularly novel. The investigation has some potential merits, but it needs much work in order to improve the quality.

1. The abstract must be thoroughly revised

2. In the Introduction, the novelty of the study is not properly justified compared to the published state-of-the-art

3. Several methodological steps must be clarirified

4. Statistical analysis completely lacks

5. Results and Discussions section should be separated, since now there is a mix of results of the study and interpretation, which makes diffficult to read the paper

6. The quality of the figures must be improved (small text and confusing colors)

7. The Conclusions section should be shortened.

Some other comments/suggestions are reported in the commented MS in attachment. Finally, I suggest a significant revision of English. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Dear Editor,

after a careful read, I think that the paper, although being potentially intersting, must be significantly improved before considering its publication in the journal.

Regards,

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper deals with the geochemical analysis of surface and groundwater interaction. The idea is welcomed; such research nowadays is beneficial. 

The paper is, in general, well structured, methodology is defined quite solid. 

I want to give two suggestions. 

The first is that paper is more appropriate for some journal that deals with water, for example, MDPI Hydrology, Water, Environments... This is a rejection of the manuscript only on the base of the selection of the journal. 

Second, I suggest a major revision if the paper is considered for review. Here are my arguments for it.

-although the geochemistry analysis is perfectly done, hydrogeological explanations must be provided. Transversal and longitudinal profiles of the soil are not included here. There is a short explanation of the hydrogeological properties, but accurate conclusions cannot be provided without the presentation of the layers of the soil, rocks, and water locations.

-also, pictures of the site need to be included. They should be provided to understand the field conditions where research was provided. 

-literature review cannot be written in a manner that there are references in the brackets, without any explanation. For example, ''Surface water (SW) and groundwater (GW) are inseparable and important water re-31 sources, and the interaction between them plays an important role in the water cycle and 32 the sustainable development [1-2]. Geological and geomorphic conditions [3-4], river 33 characteristics [5-6], climate change and human activities [7-8] influence the spatial distribution of SW and GW and their hydraulic connection.''

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for revising the manuscript.

Minor editing of English language required

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have replied to almost all the reviewers' concern and now the paper is significantly improved.

Reviewer 3 Report

This time everything is fine.