Essential Ocean Variables for Marine Environment Monitoring: Metrological Case Studies
, Francesca Romana Pennecchi, Francesca Durbiano, Stefano Pavarelli, Chiara Musacchio, Graziano Coppa, Andrea Merlone and Michela SegaRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a review paper about essential ocean variables for marine environment monitoring. It is well structured and very interesting. However, there are some serious technical defects.
1. In the abstract, it is difficult to identify the main contributions of the paper to marine environmental monitoring. Therefore, the authors need to highlight innovation and contributions in the abstract.
2. The authors need to use figures and tables to display the content and results of the references, which is beneficial for readers to better understand. For example: metrological case studies.
3. The article only has 28 references, which is sufficient for research papers. However, for a review, this is far from enough. The authors can add relevant references, such as doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114677 and doi.org/10.3390/jmse11050997 .
4. There are some formatting issues with the article. In addition, the format of the references needs to meet the requirements of the journal.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
MANUSCRIPT jmse-2509170
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their precious comments, which contributed to improve the manuscript. Detailed answers to their requests are reported below. A check of the English language was carried out throughout the paper.
REVIEWER 1
This is a review paper about essential ocean variables for marine environment monitoring. It is well structured and very interesting. However, there are some serious technical defects.
- In the abstract, it is difficult to identify the main contributions of the paper to marine environmental monitoring. Therefore, the authors need to highlight innovation and contributions in the abstract.
The abstract was modified to better highlight the innovation and contributions to marine environmental monitoring.
- The authors need to use figures and tables to display the content and results of the references, which is beneficial for readers to better understand. For example: metrological case studies.
Some figures of the cited references were added in different sections of the paper, to describe some of the metrological case studies reported.
- The article only has 28 references, which is sufficient for research papers. However, for a review, this is far from enough. The authors can add relevant references, such as doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114677 and doi.org/10.3390/jmse11050997
Additional bibliographic sources were added.
Unfortunately, the two suggested references could not be included in the text, because their themes were not related to the topics of the present paper. The first reference dealt with “ship-radiated noise signal (S-RNS)” (research object in the field of underwater acoustic signal, which contains information on ship characteristics, such as speed, tonnage and category); the second reference dealt with “Feature Extraction of Ship-Radiated Noise Based on Multiscale Fuzzy Dispersion Entropy”.
- There are some formatting issues with the article. In addition, the format of the references needs to meet the requirements of the journal.
The text of the article and the references were checked for formatting issues, to meet the requirements of the journal.
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors contributions
The paper emphasizes the significance of understanding the condition and changes in the oceans due to their impact on the Earth's global cycle. By monitoring the oceans, scientists and oceanographers can gather valuable data on temperature, acidity, and stratification, which are crucial for studying climate change and its effects on marine ecosystems.
The paper discusses the role of metrology in the marine sector and its contribution to oceanographic research. It emphasizes the use of concepts such as metrological traceability and measurement uncertainty to ensure the comparability of data acquired in different experimental conditions, locations, and time periods. By incorporating metrology, scientists can establish standardized measurement approaches and enhance the accuracy and reliability of oceanographic data.
The paper provides examples of how metrology has been successfully applied in oceanographic research. It highlights ongoing activities in research cooperation at the European level, showcasing the practical implementation of metrological principles and techniques. By sharing these examples, the paper contributes to the dissemination of knowledge and encourages further exploration and application of metrology in oceanography.
Limitations of this work
The excerpt provided does not delve into specific limitations or challenges associated with using metrology in oceanographic research. While it highlights the contributions and potential applications, a more in-depth analysis of the limitations, obstacles, and potential areas of improvement would provide a more balanced perspective.
The examples presented in the paper primarily focus on past and ongoing activities in the European research cooperation framework. This geographical limitation may overlook valuable contributions and advancements made by other regions and countries in the field of metrology and oceanographic research. A broader perspective that encompasses global efforts would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.
I have some reviewer notes
The work is well organized and comprehensively described.
The scientific sound of work have to be improved.
Abstract. Where the results can be used in practice? How the work will be continued?
Introduction. The aim of this work is not clearly presented.
“Discussion” part have to be removed as section. The main sections titles are 3.1, 3.2 …
Page 7. “The authors in [23] addressed…”. What are the limitations of this work? What can be improved?
Source [11] is cited more than two times.
28 literature sources are not enough for review paper. Find more sources on this topic.
Conclusion. Do not cite literature sources in conclusion part. Where the results can be used in practice? How the work will be continued? What are the unsolved problems? What direction of research is proposed? What is the area of improvement?
I have some suggestions
Make more comparative analyses with other papers.
Make better critical analysis.
Do not cite literature sources more than two times.
Check the limitations of this work and propose variant to be improved.
Minor editing of English language required.
Author Response
MANUSCRIPT jmse-2509170
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their precious comments, which contributed to improve the manuscript. Detailed answers to their requests are reported below. A check of the English language was carried out throughout the paper.
REVIEWER 2
Authors contributions
The paper emphasizes the significance of understanding the condition and changes in the oceans due to their impact on the Earth's global cycle. By monitoring the oceans, scientists and oceanographers can gather valuable data on temperature, acidity, and stratification, which are crucial for studying climate change and its effects on marine ecosystems.
The paper discusses the role of metrology in the marine sector and its contribution to oceanographic research. It emphasizes the use of concepts such as metrological traceability and measurement uncertainty to ensure the comparability of data acquired in different experimental conditions, locations, and time periods. By incorporating metrology, scientists can establish standardized measurement approaches and enhance the accuracy and reliability of oceanographic data.
The paper provides examples of how metrology has been successfully applied in oceanographic research. It highlights ongoing activities in research cooperation at the European level, showcasing the practical implementation of metrological principles and techniques. By sharing these examples, the paper contributes to the dissemination of knowledge and encourages further exploration and application of metrology in oceanography.
Limitations of this work
The excerpt provided does not delve into specific limitations or challenges associated with using metrology in oceanographic research. While it highlights the contributions and potential applications, a more in-depth analysis of the limitations, obstacles, and potential areas of improvement would provide a more balanced perspective.
The examples presented in the paper primarily focus on past and ongoing activities in the European research cooperation framework. This geographical limitation may overlook valuable contributions and advancements made by other regions and countries in the field of metrology and oceanographic research. A broader perspective that encompasses global efforts would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.
Some paragraphs in the manuscript were added to highlight the challenges and, in some cases, the limitations related to the application of metrology in the oceanic research.
The authors also added and discussed some examples of metrological contributions from the International context, to give a broader perspective of the theme.
I have some reviewer notes:
The work is well organized and comprehensively described.
The scientific sound of work have to be improved.
- Where the results can be used in practice? How the work will be continued?
The abstract was modified to better underline the possible practical applications and future developments in the marine monitoring field.
- The aim of this work is not clearly presented.
The aim of the work was explicated in the introduction section.
- “Discussion” part have to be removed as section. The main sections titles are 3.1,3.2 …
The “discussion” title was removed and the new section titles were modified accordingly.
- Page 7. “The authors in [23] addressed…”. What are the limitations of this work? What can be improved?
In the text, a more extensive discussion of the limitations of the work in [23, now 44] was added. In particular, factors as the non-exact co-location of the samples, the differences between the temperature of the air-water equilibrator with respect to SST, and the increase of DIC during the timeframe of the sampling campaigns could have some influence on the results of the research.
- Source [11] is cited more than two times.
Source n. 11 referred to GCOS, and it was repeated after the definitions of the considered EOVs, reported in the paper to introduce the different paragraphs. The multiple repetition of the reference (now n. 15) was removed throughout the text.
- 28 literature sources are not enough for review paper. Find more sources on this topic.
Additional relevant references were added in the text.
- Do not cite literature sources in conclusion part.
The source in the “conclusions” referred to the website of the H2020 project MINKE. The reference was removed from the section, as it was previously cited in the text.
Where the results can be used in practice? How the work will be continued? What are the unsolved problems? What direction of research is proposed? What is the area of improvement?
A paragraph was added in the Conclusions to address some of the above questions.
I have some suggestions:
Make more comparative analyses with other papers. Make better critical analysis.
The authors added other papers in the manuscript and compared them more critically.
Do not cite literature sources more than two times.
The text was modified accordingly.
Check the limitations of this work and propose variant to be improved.
Some additional comments on the limitations of the work presented were added in the text.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
It’s ok.
