Bird Communities and the Rehabilitation of Al Karaana Lagoons in Qatar

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

This manuscript describes and analyzes changes in bird biodiversity in an artificial wetland located in Qatar. Overall, the paper is a good exploration of the change in bird diversity and is well written. My main suggestion would be to better consider the change in community composition in addition to the indices (alpha, beta, gamma diversity; increasing/decreasing), as species identity is a critical component of bird biodiversity trends and greatly contributes to ecosystem function. Adding community composition data would also better support your observations about different habitat use and recommendations for pond design.

 

Introduction:

• The time lapse of the site is quite helpful in providing context. It would be nice to see the broader landscape context of the site as well, particularly because of the described flyway links.
• L63-L66: I would appreciate the bird species statistics given being limited to birds using wetland habitat, since that is the focus of this paper.

 

Methods

• Appreciate the explanation for morning and evening surveys. Could you please also address how behavior at different times of day impacted detectability (e.g. pre-dawn birdsong).
• In addition to the diagram in Figure 2, a few site photos would be helpful. Photos on the ground before and after restoration would be particularly valuable.
• For Table 1, are the ponds filled to capacity at all times?
• Did you attempt to talk to the consulting firms who conducted the pre-remediation surveys?

Results

• Table 3 is very confusing. Not sure why we're adding things, particularly for beta diversity…
• For Table 4, what do the "Most abundant species" column mean? Why are there two numbers for 2020.
• It would be helpful to provide more information about the species found for each time period (even as supplemental information). I suggest full species lists with abundances.
• I also suggest adding some details about the species you name e.g. if they are wetland specialists, residents, etc etc.
• I like the shading for ecologically important time periods in Figure 4, but I would appreciate you adding months/years as this is how you discuss the data everywhere else (e.g. December 2020). Higher fall/winter diversity looks to be driven by the second field season in particular.
• What is the magnitude of the increase or decrease? Please add this information I think this is also important! Small increases/decreases are more likely to be measurement variability. In addition, which species are increasing or decreasing? The change in community composition is likewise important.

Discussion

• I appreciate contextualizing the quantitative results with species life history information.
• Similarly L444 discussion of the physical characteristics is particularly useful. Additional analysis of community composition would tie in well to this discussion.
• Additional community composition analysis would also help explain differences in diversity between migratory and summer periods, as discussed in 4.3.
• L505 you use the scientific names of species, where previously you have used common names. Check journal requirements (and I suggest being consistent).
• Good discussion of conservation challenges.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please see the attached reply to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

All comments and suggestion for Authors are in pdf file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please see our reply to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors present an interesting study on change in bird community in retaliation to rehabilitation of Al Karaana Lagoons in Qatar. The bright side of the manuscript is that to provide some useful practical details on related topic. Study design and research questions are clearly described. In this sense, it is easy to understand the aim of this study. However, some parts of the manuscript are not easy to understand (mentioned below). Because of these reasons, only minor concerns are raised. Therefore, I would like to make some suggestions to improve the quality of the paper as below:

Line 30-33: This sentence is too long. Please re-phase this sentence with shorter separate sentences.

Line 39: Authors should explain the importance of the results here. A sentence is needed to describe “What is the importance of the results and how the results contribute to field”. In my opinion, it is always good to finish the abstract with such a sentence.

Line 44: Naturally occurring wetlands -> Natural wetlands

Line 45: Wildlife populations -> wildlife

Naturally occurring wetlands are highly diverse ecosystems that greatly benefit both their wildlife populations and the environment, from promoting biodiversity and providing habitats, to acting as a carbon sink and wind buffer

Lines 47-48: “Studies have shown that these advantages can be replicated with great success via artificial - or constructed – wetlands” this sentence can be re-written as “Many studies demonstrated that artificial - or constructed – wetlands also provide ecosystem services (citations). Please add more citations.

Line 64: vital -> important

Line 71-73: Please re-phase this sentence.

Lines 89-102: Please re-phase this paragraph since it is not easy to understand. This part of the paper important since the purpose and hypothesis (I mean; what is the problem and what did the authors do to solve this problem) of the study are given here.

Lines 91-92: “The numbers and diversity of bird populations at the Al Karaana Lagoons were specifically observed.” What the authors mean by numbers? number of birds species observed or individual number of birds for each species? Same situation for diversity. Please clarify.

Line 92: “We hypothesized that diversity would increase…” density should be clarified. Species, Population for each species, community, or taxonomical diversity?

Lines 98-101: The aim of the study should be clearly mentioned considering above there comments.

Line 109: Wildlife surveys –> Field surveys

Line 109-110: I think this sentence would be better fit as “Field surveys were conducted over the span of two years (December 2019-Sep- 109 September 2021) using point count and line transects.

Line 117: Each survey -> Each line transect surveys

Line 228: I my opinion, results should be started with findings of the surveys. How many bird species observed as a total during the surveys, and before and after rehabilitation should be given. List of bird species including their conservation status may also be given as a supplementary file.

Line 266: Brach names of Figure 3 is not easy to understand. Please add more accurate names.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please see our reply to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I greatly appreciate your thorough response to my previous comments. I think that your work has improved the quality and utility of the manuscript.

My only remaining comment would be to mention in the paragraph starting L158 the information that you chose survey times (7am/evening) based on the 2015 report.

Nice work!

Author Response

Thank you for accepting our manuscript.  We have now included the time of the morning surveys around 0600 and 0700 based on the KEO report (2017) in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

I am very satisfied with the changes made and the response to the reviewer. I have no further comments. I wish you the success.

Author Response

Thank you so much for accepting our revise manuscript.  We truly appreciate it.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors improved the manuscript by previous comments and explained the missing points. Observed bird list were added as a supplementary file. The manuscript gives details about changes in bird community in retaliation to rehabilitation of Al Karaana Lagoons in Qatar and the bright side of the manuscript is that to provide some useful practical details. In this context, manuscript may contribute related fields.

Author Response

Thank you so much for accepting our revised manuscript.  We appreciate you recognizing the value of the information provided through our study.