Chemical Characteristics and Controlling Factorsof Groundwater in Chahannur Basin

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

Please see the attached file herein.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

I am very happy that the experts can give such valuable suggestions, I very much agree with your suggestions, your expert advice so that the whole article has a great improvement.  It has been revised completely according to the expert opinion, and has replied to the expert opinion one by one, please check with the expert.  Amend the statement to read as follows:

1. The title includes the genetic analysis, but nothing is mentioned in the manuscript.

Thank you very much for your advice. I have revised the title and the conclusion, explaining how the chemical type of groundwater is affected.

2. There is no information about Kriging interpolation.

Thank you very much for your advice. I have defined the principle and method of Kriging interpolation and the functions used in 2.3 Analysis method.

3. Please rewrite the abstract by following the MDPI instruction.

Abstract: The abstract should be a total of approximately 200 words maximum. The abstract should be a single paragraph and should follow the style of structured abstracts, but without headings: 1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; 2) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied. Include any relevant preregistration numbers, and species and strains of any animals used. 3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings. 4) Conclusion: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article: it must not contain results which are not presented and substantiated in the main text and should not exaggerate the main conclusions.

Thank you very much for your advice. With your advice, I feel that my writing level has improved. According to your suggestion, I have rewritten the summary and divided it into four aspects: 1) background and purpose; 2) Method；3) Result:；4）Conclusion.

4. Please rewrite the introduction by following the MDPI instruction. The information regarding Chahannur Lake shifts it to the study area portion.

Introduction: The introduction should briefly place the study in a broad context and highlight why it is important. It should define the purpose of the work and its significance, including specific hypotheses being tested. The current state of the research field should be reviewed carefully and key publications cited. Please highlight controversial and diverging hypotheses when necessary. Finally, briefly mention the main aim of the work and highlight the main conclusions. Keep the introduction comprehensible to scientists working outside the topic of the paper.

Thank you very much for your advice. With your advice, I feel that my writing level has improved. According to your suggestions, I have rewritten the introduction part, sorted out the research significance of the paper, and then led to the proposition of the paper. Thank you again for your suggestions.

5. Rewrite lines 49-56, 76-78, 88-90, 99-100, 106-110, 117-119, 125-128, 152-154 and so on…

Thank you very much for your suggestion. I have rewritten the corresponding text description.

6. Change caption for Figure 1, Figure 4 (also classify for the symbol).

Thank you very much for your advice.The title of FIG. 1 has been modified to "Bitmap of hydrochemical sampling points in the Cahannur Watershed".The title of FIG. 4 has been revised to "Chart of Chemical Origin Analysis of Groundwater".

7. The results comprise only figures without any description. The figures are described barely in the discussion.

Thank you very much for your advice. I have revised the conclusion.

8. Make a table with the components for a comparison.

Thank you very much for your advice. I have drawn the table and compared it.

9. There is inconsistency in representing the Figures. First, Figure 1 explains a large jump for Figure 7. Rearrange the figures and explain in the text accordingly.

Thank you very much for your advice. I have rearranged the charts and explained them accordingly.

10. Rewrite sections 3.1, 3.3 and 3.4.

Thank you very much for your advice and I have reworked sections 3.1, 3.3 and 3.4.

11. Include the classification of five types of water (Class I, Class II……)

Thank you very much for your advice. I have added the classification standards of five types of water, see Section 3.3 for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

water-2232665

Water chemical characteristics and genetic analysis of groundwater in Chahannur Basin

 

 

 

I reviewed your manuscript “

 Water chemical characteristics and genetic analysis of groundwater in Chahannur Basin” very judiciously. The work carried out in the manuscript is very interesting and seems scientifically logical. However, there are some inaccuracies in this work and before publication, it needs to restructure the research manuscript. Therefore, I would like to recommend this article for "Minor Revision".

1.    Title

I suggest to author to make title more attractive and eye catching.

2.    Abstract

Author should add the numerical values in the abstract section to make it more attractive for the readers. Keywords should be in the alphabet order.

 

3.    Introduction

The novelty of this work was not specified; authors should discuss the novelty of their work in the introduction section. As reference I recommend some article which can beneficial to author. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2020.1846732 chemical physics letters 805, (2022)

4.    Read the manuscript diligently and remove all the typographical  mistakes.

Author Response

I am very happy that the experts can give such valuable suggestions, I very much agree with your suggestions, your expert advice so that the whole article has a great improvement.  It has been revised completely according to the expert opinion, and has replied to the expert opinion one by one, please check with the expert.  Amend the statement to read as follows:

1.Title

I suggest to author to make title more attractive and eye catching.

Thank you very much for your advice. I have changed the title to: Chemical Characteristics and Controlling Factors of groundwater in Chahannur Basin。

2.Abstract

Author should add the numerical values in the abstract section to make it more attractive for the readers. Keywords should be in the alphabet order.

Thank you very much for your advice, I have added important values in the summary section，and meantime，I have sorted the keywords alphabetically.

3.Introduction

The novelty of this work was not specified; authors should discuss the novelty of their work in the introduction section. As reference I recommend some article which can beneficial to author. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2020.1846732 chemical physics letters 805, (2022)

Thank you very much for your recommendation, I have added this article: "Quality assessment of the noncarbonated-bottled drinking water: A comparison of their treatment techniques". See line 386 for details.

4. Read the manuscript diligently and remove all the typographical  mistakes.

Thank you very much for your advice. Read the manuscript carefully and delete all typographical errors.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

The purposes of the manuscript water-2232665 are to  analyzes the hydrochemical characteristics of groundwater in Chahannur Basin througt Piper triplex chart, Gibbs model and variance comparison.

The paper appears no well-structured and some sections must be improved.  Therefore, I believe  the manuscript should be published only after major revision.

Comments (R = row#):

R=30: in the introduction Chahannur is always written in a different font!

R=93: in this section, methods of sampling and analysis of the waters studied must be indicated, with the relative values of precision and analytical accuracy!

R=130: use box plots to better describe and visualize these characteristics and variations.

R=140: To evaluate the chemical composition of the water it is not enough to use the Piper diagram because it does not take into account (as proposed by the authors) salinity, I suggest using a TIS salinity diagram, as proposed by: [1]

R=145: in the legend of figure 3, the chemical types should be written in extended form !

R=149: it is figure 4 and not 7!

R=160: Are you referring to K or Cl?

R=163: it is figure 5 and not 8!

R=171: it is figure 5 and not 8!

R=177: nothing is said of the samples that are enriched in Mg .... could they derive from the dissolution of mafic phases?

R=179: it is figure 5 and not 8!

R=185: Other elements, such as sulphate, could also derive from sulfides such as pyrite. See for example the work of: [2]

R=190: it is figure 5 and not 8!

R=203: To confirm this hypothesis the CAI indices or other binary diagrams could be used! as proposed by: [3]- [4]

R=204: it is not reported how the maps were built, only a hint of kriging is mentioned above but nothing specific... which kriging? which divariogram model? etc. etc

From 299 to 301: this sentence is not clear and the concept seems wrong!

From 329 to 336: the text here has another format!

 

Discussion and conclusions should be revised taking into account the previous comments

English must be reviewed by a native speaker

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADD THESE REFERENCES

 

 

[1]- Apollaro, C., Tripodi, V., Vespasiano, G., De Rosa, R., Dotsika, E., Fuoco, I., Critelli, S. and Muto, F., 2019. Chemical, isotopic and geotectonic relations of the warm and cold waters of the Galatro and Antonimina thermal areas, southern Calabria, Italy. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 109, pp.469-483.

 

[2]- Fuoco, I., De Rosa, R., Barca, D., Figoli, A., Gabriele, B. and Apollaro, C., 2022. Arsenic polluted waters: Application of geochemical modelling as a tool to understand the release and fate of the pollutant in crystalline aquifers. Journal of Environmental Management, 301, p.113796.

 

[3]- Fuoco, I., et al. "Use of reaction path modelling to investigate the evolution of water chemistry in shallow to deep crystalline aquifers with a special focus on fluoride." Science of The Total Environment 830 (2022): 154566.

 

[4]- Zaidi, F.K., Nazzal, Y., Jafri, M.K., Naeem, M. and Ahmed, I., 2015. Reverse ion exchange as a major process controlling the groundwater chemistry in an arid environment: a case study from northwestern Saudi Arabia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187, pp.1-18.

Author Response

I am very happy that the experts can give such valuable suggestions, I very much agree with your suggestions, your expert advice so that the whole article has a great improvement.  It has been revised completely according to the expert opinion, and has replied to the expert opinion one by one, please check with the expert.  Amend the statement to read as follows:

The paper appears no well-structured and some sections must be improved. Therefore, I believe the manuscript should be published only after major revision.

Comments (R = row#):

R=30: in the introduction Chahannur is always written in a different font!

Reply:In the introduction, the writing method of Chahannur Basin has been unified.

R=93: in this section, methods of sampling and analysis of the waters studied must be indicated, with the relative values of precision and analytical accuracy!

Reply:Sampling and analysis methods for the waters under study as well as longitude and relative values of longitude for analysis have been added. See Section 2.2 Sample collection and analysis for details.

R=130: use box plots to better describe and visualize these characteristics and variations.

Reply:Thank you very much for your suggestions. I have used boxplot to describe and visualize these feature changes.

R=140: To evaluate the chemical composition of the water it is not enough to use the Piper diagram because it does not take into account (as proposed by the authors) salinity, I suggest using a TIS salinity diagram, as proposed by: [1]

Reply:Thank you very much for your advice. Since there is no tis mapping software, I cannot draw TIS maps, but I have drawn TDS distribution map, which can show the distribution of salinity in groundwater. I will soon purchase software to draw TIS maps. Thanks again for your advice.

R=145: in the legend of figure 3, the chemical types should be written in extended form !

Reply:Thank you very much for your advice. I have modified the legend in Figure 3.

R=149: it is figure 4 and not 7!

Reply:Thank you very much for your reminding. I have changed it to Figure 4.

R=160: Are you referring to K or Cl?

Reply:Thank you very much for your reminding. I have changed it to K+.

R=163: it is figure 5 and not 8!

Reply:Thank you very much for your reminding. I have changed the figure 8 to Figure 5.

R=171: it is figure 5 and not 8!

Reply:Thank you very much for your reminding. I have changed the figure 8 to Figure 5.

R=177: nothing is said of the samples that are enriched in Mg .... could they derive from the dissolution of mafic phases?

Reply:Thank you very much for your valuable advice. At present, there is no relevant data to prove this point. I will strengthen the follow-up research.

R=179: it is figure 5 and not 8!

Reply:Thank you very much for your reminding. I have changed the figure 8 to Figure 5.

R=185: Other elements, such as sulphate, could also derive from sulfides such as pyrite. See for example the work of: [2]

Reply:Thank you very much for your suggestion. I have rewritten relevant content and quoted literature [2].

R=190: it is figure 5 and not 8!

Reply:Thank you very much for your reminding. I have changed the figure 8 to Figure 5.

R=203: To confirm this hypothesis the CAI indices or other binary diagrams could be used! as proposed by: [3]- [4].

Reply:Thank you very much for your suggestion. I have rewritten relevant content and quoted literature [3-4].

R=204: it is not reported how the maps were built, only a hint of kriging is mentioned above but nothing specific... which kriging? which divariogram model? etc. Etc

Reply:Thank you very much for your advice. I have defined the principle and method of Kriging interpolation and the functions used in 2.3 Analysis method.

From 299 to 301: this sentence is not clear and the concept seems wrong!

Reply:The concept of this sentence has been revised, see 3.4Source determination of groundwater chemical components

From 329 to 336: the text here has another format!

Reply:Thank you very much for your advice. I have modified the text format.

Discussion and conclusions should be revised taking into account the previous comments

English must be reviewed by a native speaker

Reply:Thank you very much for your suggestions and opinions. I have revised the discussion and conclusion considering the previous opinions. And found native English speakers to modify the text.

ADD THESE REFERENCES

[1]- Apollaro, C., Tripodi, V., Vespasiano, G., De Rosa, R., Dotsika, E., Fuoco, I., Critelli, S. and Muto, F., 2019. Chemical, isotopic and geotectonic relations of the warm and cold waters of the Galatro and Antonimina thermal areas, southern Calabria, Italy. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 109, pp.469-483.

[2]- Fuoco, I., De Rosa, R., Barca, D., Figoli, A., Gabriele, B. and Apollaro, C., 2022. Arsenic polluted waters: Application of geochemical modelling as a tool to understand the release and fate of the pollutant in crystalline aquifers. Journal of Environmental Management, 301, p.113796.

[3]- Fuoco, I., et al. "Use of reaction path modelling to investigate the evolution of water chemistry in shallow to deep crystalline aquifers with a special focus on fluoride." Science of The Total Environment 830 (2022): 154566.

[4]- Zaidi, F.K., Nazzal, Y., Jafri, M.K., Naeem, M. and Ahmed, I., 2015. Reverse ion exchange as a major process controlling the groundwater chemistry in an arid environment: a case study from northwestern Saudi Arabia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187, pp.1-18.

Reply:I have added these documents as detailed in paragraphs 12-15.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

The manuscript is now much improved. The authors have done a great job of responding to all comments over the article indeed a typo mistake should be corrected. This manuscript will make a good contribution to the scientific community as a research article. Thank you for all your efforts. I recommend to accept this article to publish.

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

followed the comments of the reviewers, the article has improved

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

An explanation of the significance of the study (e.g., what this area is important to study) must be added.

In the M&M section, the authors should address how (how+how many at each location) they collected samples with details. Accordingly, the number of samples for variance calculation should be provided.

Definition for 'Research area ' in Figure 1 should be given.

In the explanation of the results, the authors mentioned that the magnitude of several properties increases from NW to SE and that of the others increases from the edge to the center. (Even the figures look the same each other)

In the Results and discussion section, the word "grade" was used several times without any definition.

Details on the first sentence in "3.2 Chemical types..." should be explained.

Figure 6 has not been mentioned in the text.

'Lining coefficient' in Table 1 should defined and explained prior to its use.

The conclusion section should be significantly modified. The authors said that the lake is significantly affected by human activities three times. However, the first sentence of the third paragraph said 'the main factor is rock weathering'.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper needs substantial revision before consideration for publication. The overall writing needs to be improved, and it is not easy to obtain the specific research content and relevant conclusions of the manuscript in its current form. Some suggestions are as follows:

 

Line 10: What is the internal connection between the research significance of this sentence (e.g., air pollution) and the main research content of this paper, i.e., the hydrogeochemical characteristics and formation and evolution mechanism of groundwater?

 

Line 13 to 15: These contents should be explained in the materials and methods rather than in the abstract.

 

Line 18 to 19: The four major water chemistry types comprise a total of 48.08%. What are the other 51.92%? The proportion is suggested to be included in the results and discussion, not in the abstract.

 

Line 26 to 28: The study in the manuscript was about hydrogeochemical characteristics and underlying mechanisms. How did the results and conclusions provide a scientific basis for the cause of decreasing the Chahannur Lake?

 

Line 32 to 42: These contents should be placed in the methods or the overview of the study area.

 

Line 48 to 79: The introduction to the manuscript should be a summary of previously published literature rather than a list of references.

 

Line 84 to 87: What is the scientific connection between the air quality problems and the research content of this paper?

 

Line 117 to 118: In the manuscript, the author refers to all groundwater depths lower than 170m as shallow groundwater. What is the basis of the definition?  Please give more descriptions

 

Line 359 to 368: The argumentation of the results and conclusions in this part is insufficient, and more analysis of relevant content is needed to support the conclusions in this part.