Quantitative Assessment of the Influences of Three Gorges Dam on the Water Level of Poyang Lake, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The presented work deals with the study of the seasonal variation of water level at a lake that is a tributary of Yangtze River, analyzing the impact of the upstream Three Gorges reservoir operation. It is an interesting river management problem for the technical/scientific community.
However, it is very difficult to read it in its actual version. In my opinion it deserves a sound language revision before it can be further revised.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thanks for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Quantitative assessment of the influences of Three Gorges Dam on water level of Poyang Lake, China since 2003” (ID: water-531336). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main responds to your comments are as flowing:
Point 1: “However, it is very difficult to read it in its actual version. In my opinion it deserves a sound language revision before it can be further revised.”
Response 1: Thank you very much for your suggestion. Our professional English really needs to be furtherly improved. We have carefully revised the manuscript according the suggestion from all reviewer and then improved the English expression through a professional English editing company. The Language Edition Certificate is shown in attachment "Language Edition Certificate".
Special thanks to you for your good comments.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper, and are marked in red in revised manuscript.
We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Dan Wang
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Very good paper!
Minor observations:
Lines 129, 134 and others: Use variables only italic (e.g. S, Z, etc.)
Line 129 after: After equations use “.” and not comma if it follows a new sentence (eq. 1, eq. 2, eq. 4, etc.)
Lines 133, 150, and others: “where” non indented.
Line 283: In fig. 7 complete the legend with red line and display the equations and R^2 for trendlines as in fig. 8.
Line 285: Correct levl with level. Check for spelling errors.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thanks for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Quantitative assessment of the influences of Three Gorges Dam on water level of Poyang Lake, China since 2003” (ID: water-531336). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The main responds to your comments are as flowing:
Point 1: “Minor observations”
Response 1: Thank you very much for your careful reading and suggestion on minor observations. We have revised these one by one and the details are shown as follow:
Italic variables: Lines 129, 134 and other variables are modified and they can be found in lines 130, 136, 212, 224, 226 in the new manuscript.
Punctuation after equations: We have modified the punctuation after equations according your suggestion. “.” is used after eq.1, eq.1, eq.4, eq.8, eq.11.
Sentence format: We have modified the format of “where”, and they can be found in lines 135, 152, 158 in the new manuscript.
Fig.7: We have added the equations and R^2 for trendlines in Fig.7, and modified the legend. These can be found in line 280 in the new manuscript.
Line 285: Spelling error of “level” is modified, and it can be found in line 282 in the new manuscript.
Special thanks to you for your good comments.
We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper, and are marked in red in revised manuscript.
We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Dan Wang
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
The title of the manuscript “Quantitative assessment of the influences of Three Gorges Dam on water level of Poyang Lake, China since 2003” is of interest to the WATER journal. I find the paper and your idea that it contains really interesting. The abstract is concise and describes the contents of the paper. The methods are visibly described, and they may be applied by other scientists. However, in my opinion, in its present form, the paper needs some improvements before being published. The main aspects to be reviewed are the following.
General Comments
- The title (L:2-4) - Quantitative assessment of the influences of Three Gorges Dam on water level of Poyang Lake, China since 2003 - In reviewer’s opinion phrase “since 2003” should be removed;
- Abstract (L:30) – “The geography change ..” – whether it should be understood as “erosion of deeper channel” (in L:24) ? – this phrase should be explained/formulated more clearly.
- Section 1. Introduction – In reviewer’s opinion this section requires some corrections. Thus, text from L:47-62 should be included in section 2. Study area and data.
- Section 2. Study area and data (L:95-115) – „Geographic data” – this is not clear and should be explained;
- Section 4. Results should be combined with section 5. Discussion. Moreover, results need to be compared with other existing researches in the Discussion section. The similarity and difference between this study and other findings should be summarized and explained. The text in section 4, especially part: L228-239 at this moment includes the range of data of considerable level of detail, perhaps to present some data in the tabular format would have been a better solution?; The text L:248-257 - is, in a way a repetition of the matter contained in the Table 1...- it should be written more compactly (or removed);
Minor correction:
L:97 - ..Dongting Lake..
L:130 – The sgn () – please, complete it;
L:157 - DZl – this should be described;
L:217 – “...,the difference..”
Remarks regarding Tables and Figures:
L:285: description should be corrected;
Bibliography:
The list of publications should be corrected, standardised and adapted to the requirements of the WATER journal.
Best regards,
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thanks for your comments concerning our manuscript and please see the attachment.
Thank you and best regards.
Yours sincerely,
Dan Wang
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
