The Distribution and Succession of Filamentous Algae in the Southern Taihang Catchment under Different Nutrient Regimes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

you'll find in attachment general and specific comments

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English should be carefully checked.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

After a thorough review of the  MS “The distribution and succession of filamentous algae in the southern Taihang catchment under different nutrient regimes." , I believe that this MS presents valuable insights into the ecological dynamics of filamentous algae and their response to varying nutrient conditions.

I appreciate the authors' efforts in this important area of research. The authors have conducted a comprehensive study that contributes significantly to our understanding of algal distribution and succession in freshwater ecosystems. The methodology is sound, and the results are clearly presented, offering a solid foundation for the conclusions drawn.

However, I recommend that the manuscript undergo  revisions to enhance clarity and strengthen the overall presentation.  Some terms used in both introduction and discussion could benefit from clearer definitions to ensure that all readers, regardless of their background, can fully grasp the concepts presented.

Authors should avoid writing general sentences. For example therelationship between eutrophication and algae is very clear for everyone. However this has to be mentioned in the scale of study sites. Here we only see a general sentences for both. How the case in the study area is should be come in introduction.

Providing more context regarding the implications of the findings for local ecosystem management would enrich the discussion and highlight the practical applications of the research. Again the final conclusion is very general.

A few figures could be improved for better readability, particularly in terms of labeling and scaling, to ensure that the data is easily interpretable. For example figure 8 should be in color.

It is essential to ensure that the language used is precise and free of errors. I see some errors all over the manuscript. |Authors must carefully review the manuscript for grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors.

 

I hope that the manuscript will meet the journal's standards for publication.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Some things remain unclear, mainly in the methodology.

Here some comments

what is the difference between periphytic algae/diatoms described in the paragraph 2.2. and periphytic diatoms described in the paragraph 2.3 ?

What does periphytic algae refer to ? 

Moreover, sometimes the term benthic diatoms is used.

According to Results and Discussion, only diatoms growing on Cladophora have been studied.

2.2. Filamentous algae collection, identification and measurement 

Lines 134-135. "Then the defined area was scraped with brushes to collect all the filamentous algae and periphytic algae on the rocks."

Lines 140-144. "To estimate the periphytic algae biomass, at least 10 individuals for each species were measured and then approximations to geometric solids were applied to calculate individual biovolume[20]. Periphytic algae biomass was estimated from the biovolume, assuming that 10⁶μm3 corresponds to 1 μg of biomass."  (Sentences added in the reviewed manuscript)

Lines 147-149. It is really unusual the determination of the abundance of macroalgae (Cladophora, Spirogyra,..) by counting the number of cells per square centimeter. Moreover, differently from the previous paragraph, the Authors speak here of the abundance of periphytic diatom and not of periphytic algae.

In the next paragraph the Authors speak of periphytic diatoms

2.3. Periphytic diatom collection, identification and measurement 

What did the Authors measure of Periphytic diatom?

Lines 154-155. "Periphytic diatoms were collected simultaneously with filamentous algae samples using natural substrates such as stones and boulders." 

Authorities of genera and species should be corrected, see for instance

For Algae

Line 240. The correct authority of Cladophora glomerata is (Linnaeus) Kützing 

For Macrobenthos and fish

Line 276. The correct authority of Phoxinus oxycephalus is (Sauvage & Dabry de Thiersant, 1874)

Moreover, since the Authors added the Authorities to the genera Zygnema, Oedogonium and Tribonema, please add the Authorities also to the genera Cladophora and Spirogyra. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf