Monitoring of the Surface Water Regime of the Sava River Alluvium in Serbia Using Geographic Information System (GIS) Techniques

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper studies the water situation of the abandoned meandering area of the Sava River, and analyzes the hydrological conditions of the area from the natural movement of surface water-water and the conditions changed by human factors. The surface water movement parallel to the water level is shown by the Sava terrain model, namely the filling and emptying of surface water. Simulations of changes in surface water levels in the study area included conditions altered by natural and human factors, shown in the presence of flood waves (increased water level of the Sava River) and water from the pond (decreased water level of the Sava River). The results show that human factors (road construction) disturb the surface, underground and underground runoff to the natural filling process of depressions and ponds in the survey area. Moreover, prolonged stagnation of water in the depression has a negative effect to site conditions, as the development of ash and oak trees, as dominant woody species, is mainly water-dependent and still oxygen free in the root zones. Thus, they become physiologically weak and vulnerable to various pests and diseases. The author has done a lot of work, which is worthy of affirmation, but there are still shortcomings. I suggest to accept it after revision. The specific opinions are as follows:

1. The abstract section explains the research done in this paper, the research methods used and the research results obtained, but it does not indicate the research significance of the paper and the key scientific problems to be solved. It is suggested that the author summarize again.

2. The introduction part is about the application of GIS in various fields, not too many paragraphs and each paragraph is short, it is recommended to integrate it into a part to introduce.

3. On the impact of climate on vegetation and rivers, Suggest that the authors add the latest literature to illustrate, The following references are recommended: Sirui Zhang, et al.,Science of the Total Environment, 2021; Suhua Gong, et al.,Global and Planetary Change, 2023; Yingying Xue, et al.,Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2023.,Biqin Xiao, et al.,Journal of Hydrology, 2023.

4. Please check and adjust the picture, most of the pictures in the text are too small font, legend color is not obvious, the level is not prominent, unclear scale and other problems, for example, what the Figure 1 purple box circle represents, please explain, please place all the pictures in the center.

5. In the second part, the connection between the materials and methods is slightly stiff and abrupt, and it is suggested to add subtitle points to describe.

6. The part of the analysis is many and messy, so the author should describe the key research results according to the theme of the article, and pay attention to the structure and internal logical level of the article.

7. The discussion part is not closely related to the main idea of the article, and there are too many paragraphs. It is suggested to organize and merge, mainly based on the research results of this article to compare with others.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Writers are requested to carefully check the English grammar of the article to ensure the accuracy of the article language. For example, the reference to the results of previous studies should adopt the past tense rather than the present tense.

Author Response

Manuscript ID: Water-2696487

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Please find enclosed our revised version (R1) of the Manuscript Water-2696487

Title: Monitoring of surface water regime of the Sava River alluvium in Serbia by using GIS techniques

Authors: Vesna Nikolić Jokanović *, Dušan Jokanović, Radovan Savić, Tijana Vulevic, Aleksandar Andjelković, Katarina Lazarević, Ranka Kovačević, Natalija Momirović

Our responses (red text) to your comments (black text) are listed below.

---------------------

Reviewer 1

1. The abstract section explains the research done in this paper, the research methods used and the research results obtained, but it does not indicate the research significance of the paper and the key scientific problems to be solved. It is suggested that the author summarize again.

Thank you, we added in the manuscript the part related to the significance of the paper and its practical importance in the Abstract.

2. The introduction part is about the application of GIS in various fields, not too many paragraphs and each paragraph is short, it is recommended to integrate it into a part to introduce.

Thank you, we agree. We merged paragraphs which belong to the Introduction and changed this chapter a little bit.

3. On the impact of climate on vegetation and rivers, Suggest that the authors add the latest literature to illustrate, The following references are recommended: Sirui Zhang, et al.,Science of the Total Environment, 2021; Suhua Gong, et al.,Global and Planetary Change, 2023; Yingying Xue, et al., Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2023.,Biqin Xiao, et al.,Journal of Hydrology, 2023.

Thank you very much because you suggested adding these modern references. We accepted your suggestion and implemented all the references in the manuscript.

4. Please check and adjust the picture, most of the pictures in the text are too small font, legend color is not obvious, the level is not prominent, unclear scale and other problems, for example, what the Figure 1 purple box circle represents, please explain, please place all the pictures in the center.

Thank you very much, we agreed with your suggestions and therefore we changed all figures according to your instructions.

5. In the second part, the connection between the materials and methods is slightly stiff and abrupt, and it is suggested to add subtitle points to describe.

Thank you very much for giving us that idea. We agree with you and therefore we divided this chapter (Material and Methods) into two subsections.

6. The part of the analysis is many and messy, so the author should describe the key research results according to the theme of the article, and pay attention to the structure and internal logical level of the article.

Thank you. For better understanding our results and their order, we added chart flow of research ideas in order to show all steps we made.

7. The discussion part is not closely related to the main idea of the article, and there are too many paragraphs. It is suggested to organize and merge, mainly based on the research results of this article to compare with others.

Thank you very much. We accepted your suggestions and implemented all the changes in the Discussion chapter. The most important is that we compared our results to some other papers.

Writers are requested to carefully check the English grammar of the article to ensure the accuracy of the article language. For example, the reference to the results of previous studies should adopt the past tense rather than the present tense.

Thank you very much. The manuscript has been checked by a native English speaker.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript " Monitoring of surface water regime by using GIS techniques"- Water-2696487. This review article has value for the researchers in the related areas. However, the review article needs major improvement before acceptance for publication. My detailed comments are as follow:

1. Add the study site name in the title.

2. In line number 12. Add the name of the country or country to which the Sava River belongs.

3. The abstract is weak and some results must be added (Abstract should give brief information about aims, findings, methods and results of the research conducted in the article at a glance).

4. Explain the economic and environmental importance of the study area.

5. Figure No. 1 should be clearer.

6. All Figures must rewrite legend.

7. Line No. 134 and also 152...change the beginning of the lines to start from phase I&II.

8. Line No. 301. Add the author’s name before reference No. 31.

9. Line No. 304, change the place of the reference to the end of the paragraph.

10. Lines 312-315 Rewrite the paragraph.

11. Lines No. 301, 316, and 335. Add the author’s name before reference numbers 31, 35, 51, 63, 64, and 66, as well as in the rest of the research.

12. Point out on the maps the threatened places in the Sava River?

13. What about assessing the ecological state of water areas. Of particular interest is a very interesting discussion of biodiversity indices.

14. The discussion section should give an interpretation of the significance of the results obtained with reference to similar works done by other authors.

15. Comments on the Quality of English Language:

Overall, the English language is good, but sentences overloaded with repeated wrds are common. 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required.

Author Response

Manuscript ID: Water-2696487

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Please find enclosed our revised version (R2) of the Manuscript Water-2696487

Title: Monitoring of surface water regime of the Sava River alluvium in Serbia by using GIS techniques

Authors: Vesna Nikolić Jokanović *, Dušan Jokanović, Radovan Savić, Tijana Vulevic, Aleksandar Andjelković, Katarina Lazarević, Ranka Kovačević, Natalija Momirović

Our responses (red text) to your comments (black text) are listed below.

---------------------

Reviewer 2

1. Add the study site name in the title.

Thank you very much. We changed the title to „Monitoring of surface water regime of the Sava River alluvium in Serbia by using GIS techniques“

 

2. In line number 12. Add the name of the country or country to which the Sava River belongs.

      Thank you, we did it.

 

3. The abstract is weak and some results must be added (Abstract should give brief information about aims, findings, methods and results of the research conducted in the article at a glance).

Thank you. We added some results to the Abstract bearing in mind that this part should not have more than 200 words.

 

4. Explain the economic and environmental importance of the study area.

Thank you very much. The investigated area is very valuable from an economic and ecological point of view, so we explained that in the introductory part.

 

5. Figure No. 1 should be clearer.

      Thank you, we did it.

 

6. All Figures must rewrite legend.

     Thank you, we did it.

 

7. Line No. 134 and also 152...change the beginning of the lines to start from phase I&II.

     Thank you, we changed that to Phase I & II instead of I & II phase.

 

8. Line No. 301. Add the author’s name before reference No. 31.

     Thank you, we did it.

 

9. Line No. 304, change the place of the reference to the end of the paragraph.

     Thank you, we put the reference to the end of the paragraph.

 

10. Lines 312-315 Rewrite the paragraph.

     Thank you, we rewrote the paragraph.

 

11. Lines No. 301, 316, and 335. Add the author’s name before reference numbers 31, 35, 51, 63, 64, and 66, as well as in the rest of the research.

      Thank you, we did it.

 

12. Point out on the maps the threatened places in the Sava River?

Thank you. The whole investigated area is threatened and it is displayed on the map.

 

13. What about assessing the ecological state of water areas. Of particular interest is a very interesting discussion of biodiversity indices.

Thank you. We explained the ecological state of the SNR „Obedska bara“ in the Introduction. As for biodiversity indices, we didn’t make phytocenological recordings, because we just monitored the impact of changeable water regime on the dominant tree species in lowland floodplain forests.

 

14. The discussion section should give an interpretation of the significance of the results obtained with reference to similar works done by other authors.

We changed the whole Discussion comparing our results to the other papers. We also noted in this part of the manuscript the practical significance of the research.

 

15. Comments on the Quality of English Language:

Overall, the English language is good, but sentences overloaded with repeated wrds are common.

Thank you very much. The manuscript has been checked by a native English speaker.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In my opinion, the study investigates an important and topical issue, the monitoring possibilities of surface water regime by using GIS techniques. The results are of international interest, so the article is valuable addition to the literature, however the article need to be improved significantly.

The authors are advised to make modifications, corrections and additions, as listed below:

Abstract:

Add more details about the results, e.g. the simulation scenarios with water levels and the main conclusion of these.

Keywords

„ abandoned meander of the Sava River”  and „conditions altered by human factors” are not suitable as keywords, please use more general and shorter terms e.g. „water regime” „human disturbance”

Introduction

In my opinion, significant part of the introduction is not in accordance with the title of the manuscript. In line 31-52 is about plant stress and vegetation, but this ecological focus doesn’t occur in the title. The aim of the study is also not connected it very deeply. Relocate these paragraphs, or modify it.

I suggest to add more literature and information about surface water monitoring, and anthropogenic influences of wetland ecosystems. The authors could cite e.g. following article:

Hydrochemical Assessment of the Kisköre Reservoir (Lake Tisza) and the Impacts of Water Quality on Tourism Development. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081514

-        Lines 105-113: The authors should modify this paragraph, and emphasize more the novelty and importance of the recent study.

-        The authors could formulate hypothesises, and add to the end of the section introduction.

 

Materials and Methods.

Figure 1 should be modified, please add a scale bar, indicate northern direction. Moreover the  map is not well readable. Please start with the small scale maps showing Serbia, and at the end with the exact area. Add legend if possible.

Line 134. “I phase” should be modified to “Phase I.”

You could divide this chapter into subchapters. e.g. Lines 115-133: 2.1. Site characteristics  from line 134: 2.2. Geostatistical analysis, or similar.

The creation of a digital terrain model (line 134) is not statistical analysis. Please modify phase I. accordingly.

You could add a 1:50.000 topographic map as base of your work.

You could add a chart flow of your work. This would help the understand better the work steps.

Please add more geographical information about the study area and the Sava river, which influencing the flooding. E.g. precipitation, climate, anthropogenic influences.

 

Results:

Figures 2-8 should be modified: Very important to add a scale bar, and indicate northern direction.

Beside of this:

Figure 2: add a legend and values of the elevation. and the meaning of the black lines.

I don’t see much changes in the relief of the area according to figure 2, it is only the building of channel which may change the water levels, but not the relief. If the relief is also changed give more details in the text and indicate more in the figure.

Also divide roads and channels from each other. Is any drainage on the area?

Figure 3 and 4 is not referred in the text above them.

I see now in line 248-253 information about relief change. Move this information in front of figure 2.

 

Discussion.

This part need to be modified completely. The authors misunderstand this part. In the discussion part the own results should be evaluated and compared with the international literature. Now it is like another literatur review.

Rewrite this section accordingly, and don’t need to be very long.

 

My overall evaluation is, that the manuscript needs major scientific revisions.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is fine as I can judge.

Author Response

Manuscript ID: Water-2696487

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Please find enclosed our revised version (R3) of the Manuscript Water-2696487

Title: Monitoring of surface water regime of the Sava River alluvium in Serbia by using GIS techniques

Authors: Vesna Nikolić Jokanović *, Dušan Jokanović, Radovan Savić, Tijana Vulevic, Aleksandar Andjelković, Katarina Lazarević, Ranka Kovačević, Natalija Momirović

Our responses (red text) to your comments (black text) are listed below.

---------------------

Reviewer 3

Abstract:

Add more details about the results, e.g. the simulation scenarios with water levels and the main conclusion of these.

Thank you very much, we added some results in the Abstract bearing in mind it shouldn’t exceed 200 words.

Keywords

„ abandoned meander of the Sava River”  and „conditions altered by human factors” are not suitable as keywords, please use more general and shorter terms e.g. „water regime” „human disturbance”

Thank you, we did it.

Introduction

In my opinion, significant part of the introduction is not in accordance with the title of the manuscript. In line 31-52 is about plant stress and vegetation, but this ecological focus doesn’t occur in the title. The aim of the study is also not connected it very deeply. Relocate these paragraphs, or modify it.

Thank you. We eliminated everything connected with water stress in plants. We also relocated the aim of the study.

I suggest to add more literature and information about surface water monitoring, and anthropogenic influences of wetland ecosystems. The authors could cite e.g. following article:

Hydrochemical Assessment of the Kisköre Reservoir (Lake Tisza) and the Impacts of Water Quality on Tourism Development. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081514

Thank you. We added that reference to the manuscript.

 

-        Lines 105-113: The authors should modify this paragraph, and emphasize more the novelty and importance of the recent study.

Thank you, we did it.

-        The authors could formulate hypothesises, and add to the end of the section introduction.

Thank you. We explained the practical importance of the paper both in the Introduction and in the Conclusion.

Materials and Methods.

Figure 1 should be modified, please add a scale bar, indicate northern direction. Moreover the  map is not well readable. Please start with the small scale maps showing Serbia, and at the end with the exact area. Add legend if possible.

Thank you, we did everything you demanded.

Line 134. “I phase” should be modified to “Phase I.”

Thank you, we did it.

You could divide this chapter into subchapters. e.g. Lines 115-133: 2.1. Site characteristics  from line 134: 2.2. Geostatistical analysis, or similar.

Thank you, we did it.

The creation of a digital terrain model (line 134) is not statistical analysis. Please modify phase I. accordingly.

Thank you, we did it.

You could add a 1:50.000 topographic map as base of your work.

Thank you. We are afraid that this map would be very small, so it wouldn’t be visible (readable). Anyway, we changed Figure 1 which displays the position of the investigated area situated in Northern Serbia.

You could add a chart flow of your work. This would help the understand better the work steps.

Thank you, we did it.

Please add more geographical information about the study area and the Sava river, which influencing the flooding. E.g. precipitation, climate, anthropogenic influences.

Thank you. We showed the height of the Sava River water level in the last 20 years (Figure 2).

Results:

Figures 2-8 should be modified: Very important to add a scale bar, and indicate northern direction.

Thank you, we did it.

Beside of this:

Figure 2: add a legend and values of the elevation. and the meaning of the black lines.

Thank you, we did it.

I don’t see much changes in the relief of the area according to figure 2, it is only the building of channel which may change the water levels, but not the relief. If the relief is also changed give more details in the text and indicate more in the figure.

Also divide roads and channels from each other. Is any drainage on the area?

Thank you. In your last comment before Discussion you answered this question.

Figure 3 and 4 is not referred in the text above them.

Thank you. We cited all figures in the text according to the flow of results displayed.

I see now in line 248-253 information about relief change. Move this information in front of figure 2.

Thank you.

Discussion.

This part need to be modified completely. The authors misunderstand this part. In the discussion part the own results should be evaluated and compared with the international literature. Now it is like another literature review. Rewrite this section accordingly, and don’t need to be very long.

Thank you. You suggested us changing discussion and we did it. We tried to find a link between our and the results of the other papers.

English is fine as I can judge.

Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments to authors:

In this study, the authors performed the monitoring of surface water regime by using GIS technique. Overall, the study is methodologically sound with promising results. However, prior to further consideration, there are comments to be addressed:

(i) Abstract: Provide a line or two to introduce about the novelty of the research. Do not start with the abstract with ": The aim of this study is to assess the..."

(ii) Introduction: Huge revision is required. Highlight the research gaps and research objectives in the study. Some relevant literature can be included are: (i) Comparison among different ASEAN water quality indices for the assessment of the spatial variation of surface water quality in the Selangor river basin, Malaysia. (ii) Application of artificial intelligence methods for monsoonal river classification in Selangor river basin, Malaysia

(iii) Study Zone: Revise Fig 1. The quality of the figure is poor. Where is the scale bar ?

(iv) Provide a flow chart of the study to ease the understanding of the readers.

(vi) What is the calibration step for using the GIS data? Very unclear for me.

(vii) Discussion section: Not much in-depth comparison were done. I would suggest the authors to compare the findings with existing literature. Unique contributions of research should be highlighted.

(viii) Implications: The authors must develop a subsection for theoretical and practical implications. Implications could be enhanced by providing the results of your work towards the development and adoption of the current findings.

(ix) Conclusion section seems to be repetition of the results section. Huge modifications are required. Please make sure your ‘conclusion’ section underscores the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Please revise your conclusion part into more details. Basically, you should enhance your contributions, limitations, underscore the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results and future study in this section.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Manuscript ID: Water-2696487

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Please find enclosed our revised version (R4) of the Manuscript Water-2696487

Title: Monitoring of surface water regime of the Sava River alluvium in Serbia by using GIS techniques

Authors: Vesna Nikolić Jokanović *, Dušan Jokanović, Radovan Savić, Tijana Vulevic, Aleksandar Andjelković, Katarina Lazarević, Ranka Kovačević, Natalija Momirović

Our responses (red text) to your comments (black text) are listed below.

---------------------

Reviewer 4

• Abstract: Provide a line or two to introduce about the novelty of the research. Do not start with the abstract with ": The aim of this study is to assess the..."

     Thank you, we did it.

• Introduction: Huge revision is required. Highlight the research gaps and research objectives in the study. Some relevant literature can be included are: (i) Comparison among different ASEAN water quality indices for the assessment of the spatial variation of surface water quality in the Selangor river basin, Malaysia. (ii) Application of artificial intelligence methods for monsoonal river classification in Selangor river basin, Malaysia

     Thank you. We changed the Introduction a lot and added these two references.

• Study Zone: Revise Fig 1. The quality of the figure is poor. Where is the scale bar ?

     Thank you. We changed it.

• Provide a flow chart of the study to ease the understanding of the readers.

Thank you. We did it.

• What is the calibration step for using the GIS data? Very unclear for me.

    Thank you. We explained all the steps in our methodology.

• Discussion section: Not much in-depth comparison were done. I would suggest the authors to compare the findings with existing literature. Unique contributions of research should be highlighted.

Thank you. You suggested us changing discussion and we did it. We tried to find a link between our and the results of the other papers.

• Implications: The authors must develop a subsection for theoretical and practical implications. Implications could be enhanced by providing the results of your work towards the development and adoption of the current findings.

      Thank you. We explained what you suggested in the Introduction and Conclusion.

• Conclusion section seems to be repetition of the results section. Huge modifications are required. Please make sure your ‘conclusion’ section underscores the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Please revise your conclusion part into more details. Basically, you should enhance your contributions, limitations, underscore the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results and future study in this section.

Thank you. We added some significant things in our Conclusion.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Thank you. The manuscript has been checked by a native English speaker.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Accept in present form.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your suggestions which contributed to the overall quality of the paper. We checked English once again and corrected everything necessary. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 The authors have made several changes in the MS, that have significantly improved the quality of the paper.

The authors have responded to all my comments. Therefore I can recommend this manuscript for publication.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is fine.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your constructive suggestions during the review process.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have substantially addressed my comments in the revised manuscript. The current manuscript reads better and ready for publication.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Thank you very much for your constructive suggestions. We made some corrections of the English as you demanded.