Supraglacial debris cover assessment in the Caucasus Mountains, 1986-2000-2014
Anonymous · 2017
A thorough language editing is needed as there are issues and awkwardness in the sentence structure right from the first sentence of the abstract.I will not be pointing out them separately as they are present in almost every other sentence.There are several issues with the methods too as highlighted by Alifu, H. in his interactive comments.In the light of these issues, presently it is really difficult to comment upon the accuracy of the results.Also, how is this a review article as I can see in the manuscript type?It certainly is a research article and not a comprehensive review.Specific comments: Below I provide some specific recommendations and queries: Abstract The article is about debris cover and therefore it is important to state its relevance properly instead of mentioning it in sweeping terms in both, abstract as well as intro-C1 ESSDD Interactive commentPrinter-friendly version Discussion paper duction.The debris cover is relevant to study not just because of its impact on the glacier ablation but also because it is considered to be a significant part of an efficient sediment transport system (supraglacial, englacial, and subglacial) in cold and high mountains which ultimately affect the overall dynamics, and mass and energy balances of the glacier.Several studies have also reported debris cover's role in promoting the formation of supraglacial lakes.These mentions should come in the abstract and should be more detailed in the introduction along with proper references.Full forms of TM, ETM, SPOT, OLI, ALOS, ASTER etc. are not provided anywhere.