Next Article in Journal
Observation Experiment of Wind-Driven Rain Harvesting from a Building Wall
Next Article in Special Issue
Long-Term 10 m Resolution Water Dynamics of Qinghai Lake and the Driving Factors
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison of Three Techniques to Adjust Daily Precipitation Biases from Regional Climate Models over Germany
Previous Article in Special Issue
Remote Analysis of the Chlorophyll-a Concentration Using Sentinel-2 MSI Images in a Semiarid Environment in Northeastern Brazil
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

A Novel Early Warning System (EWS) for Water Quality, Integrating a High-Frequency Monitoring Database with Efficient Data Quality Control Technology at a Large and Deep Lake (Lake Qiandao), China

Water 2022, 14(4), 602; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14040602
by Liancong Luo 1,*, Jia Lan 2, Yucheng Wang 2, Huiyun Li 3,*, Zhixu Wu 2, Chrisopher McBridge 4, Hong Zhou 5, Fenglong Liu 6, Rufeng Zhang 1, Falu Gong 1, Jialong Li 1, Lan Chen 1 and Guizhu Wu 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Reviewer 4: Anonymous
Water 2022, 14(4), 602; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14040602
Submission received: 31 December 2021 / Revised: 4 February 2022 / Accepted: 13 February 2022 / Published: 16 February 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The objective of the analysis is interesting, but the current version of manuscript needs revisions before further consideration.

Firstly, the aim of the paper should be assessed more uniformly through the paper.

Moreover, the authors should start with a clear question(s) that will be answered. The objectives and/or research questions section would help to summarize and focus the overall aim of the study and improve the conclusions section, once the main ideas are clearly systematized.

As far as the methodological approach is concerning, the section “Methodology” should be further explained for a full comprehension of the analysis and for replication.

Moreover, the literature should be enriched, with recent contributions concerning water quality.

The results of the analysis should be further discussed and improved also in terms of policy implications. The contribution can be made evident only putting the accent on the gap in the literature.

The conclusions section should be improved with the weaknesses of the analysis and the insights for future research.

The quality of communication should be improved. Some sentences are not clear, and some parts are confusing.

Author Response

All the responses to comments are at the attached pdf file.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article entitled A novel early warning system (EWS) for water quality integrating high-frequency monitoring database with efficient data quality control technology at a larger and deep lake (Lake Qiandao), China deals with a very interesting topic - the new methodology in water quality monitoring. The article, however, requires some corrections. The first element is to change the structure of the abstract. One introductory sentence should be added, introducing the topic to be described. There is also no definition of the purpose of the article in the abstract. In the case of introduction, please extend the first part about the lake eutrophication. The study design is very interesting, but the fact that results are available for two parameters is insufficient. There is also no explanation of the reasons for such values and differentiation. The Discussion section should be changed to a summary. In my opinion, the type of article should be changed to short communication.

Author Response

All the responses to comments are at the attached pdf file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presented an early warning system (EWS) for water quality that integrated high-frequency monitoring database with data quality control technology. The analysis used Lake Qiandao in China as the case-study. The early warning system definitely offers great potentials for water quality monitoring and response. However, there are major issues that need to be resolved before moving forward.

  1. The idea of using wireless sensor data for water quality monitoring and warning system is not new. Several published papers are available in the last decade. The authors need to stress on how the current manuscript advances the application of the early warning system.
  2. The first sentence in the abstract is very long, and difficult to follow. Break up the sentence for clarity. It is not clear what the early warning is for.
  3. There are other long sentences in the abstract and the text throughout. It is hard to follow.
  4. The numeric values provided in the abstract are not critical. Rather focus on what improvements and advantages the early warning system can offer.
  5. Table 1: It is not clear whether the warning is given if the water quality parameter values are outside or within the given ranges? Also, how is the warning communicated to the management or concerned people?
  6. It appears that the selected warning ranges are based on historic observations. Does these ranges comply with accepted criteria for the water quality by the region/country or internationally accepted limits?
  7. The paper discusses the water quality variations, trends or patterns. However, it lacks discussion on how these plots can support the early warning.
  8. Outliers can have meaningful information, particularly in water quality aspects. More support information and analysis is needed to determine outliers, not just based on historical measurements.

Author Response

All the responses to comments are at the attached pdf file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

In this manuscript, the authors studied an early warning system based on high-frequency monitoring system for water quality with efficient data quality control technology. The subject is relevant to the scope of the journal and the paper is well organized. The manuscript is recommended for publication after addressing the following comments:

1- The quality of figures 3 and 4 can be improved.

2- The authors should clearly mention limitations and disadvantages of their proposed method in the manuscript.

3- The link provided for Supplementary Materials does not work.

4- Author Contributions, Funding, Data Availability Statement, and Conflicts of Interest should be revised.
5- It is recommended that the authors calculate and present the differences (in percent) for the comparisons carried out in the manuscript.

Author Response

All the responses to comments are at the attached pdf file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments have been addressed. Appreciate the author's efforts

Back to TopTop