Boundary Layer Height and Trends over the Tarim Basin

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work is much improved, therefore publication is recommended

Comments on the Quality of English Language

good 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your feedback. I have polished the language and the specific modification results are:

Line 25:deleted “；”.

Line 29: changed “its”to “it’s”.

Line 32:changed “The”to “the”.

Line 32:deleted “the”.

Line 42:changed “research”to “researches”.

Line 42:changed “has”to “have”.

Line69:changed “ERAnterim”to “ERA Interim”.

Line74:changed “Era-interm”to “Era-interim”.

Line69:changed “Era-interm”to “Era-interim”.

Line96:changed “Forest Model”to “forest model”.

Line145:deleted “lowest”.

Line189:added “,”.

Line196:changed “exhibite”to “Exhibite”.

Line210:deleted “.”.

Line234:deleted “.”.

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

First of all, thank you for revising and resubmitting your manuscript. The most significant deficiency in the previous version of the study was the incomplete presentation of the study motivation, leaving the analysis of ABL height and temperature relationship as a simple analysis. However, in the new version of the study, I see that you have added the relationship between ABLH and meteorological factors. Furthermore, I notice that you have obtained significant correlations using Random Forest model simulations. The study has now become more suitable for a scientific article. However, there are still some revisions needed for your study, which you can find listed below:

1. The first word is bold in the Abstract section; please correct this.

2. The term "EOF method" is used in both the Abstract section and other parts of the study, but the expansion of EOF is not provided. Please provide the expansion of EOF before using the abbreviation in both the Abstract and the first instance elsewhere in the study.

3. You have updated Figure 1, and the current version also indicates the locations of meteorological stations. It looks good.

4. In Table 1, under Methods, "linear regression method" should have "linear" capitalized.

5. Please add a period at the end of all figure and table captions.

Author Response

1. The first word is bold in the Abstract section; please correct this.

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have changed This to This.

2. The term "EOF method" is used in both the Abstract section and other parts of the study, but the expansion of EOF is not provided. Please provide the expansion of EOF before using the abbreviation in both the Abstract and the first instance elsewhere in the study.

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have added “Empirical Orthogonal Function” in line 15,94.

3. You have updated Figure 1, and the current version also indicates the locations of meteorological stations. It looks good.

Response: Thanks for your remark. 

4. In Table 1, under Methods, "linear regression method" should have "linear" capitalized.

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have changed linear to Linear.

5. Please add a period at the end of all figure and table captions.

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have added “.” in line 96.

Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No further comments

Author Response

Thank you very much for your feedback. I have polished the language and the specific modification results are:

Line 25:deleted “；”.

Line 29: changed “its”to “it’s”.

Line 32:changed “The”to “the”.

Line 32:deleted “the”.

Line 42:changed “research”to “researches”.

Line 42:changed “has”to “have”.

Line69:changed “ERAnterim”to “ERA Interim”.

Line74:changed “Era-interm”to “Era-interim”.

Line69:changed “Era-interm”to “Era-interim”.

Line96:changed “Forest Model”to “forest model”.

Line145:deleted “lowest”.

Line189:added “,”.

Line196:changed “exhibite”to “Exhibite”.

Line210:deleted “.”.

Line234:deleted “.”.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work appears to be interesting from a scientific point of view and therefore its publication is recommended

1) Rearrange the equations in the editing, in particular the font in the equations and in the text are often different, (for example line 68 with 69)

2) As a suggestion, insert a summary table of the various methods, which helps to summarize the results. in order to make them more quickly understandable

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English is good.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

The work appears to be interesting from a scientific point of view and therefore its publication is recommended

• Rearrange the equations in the editing, in particular the font in the equations and in the text are often different, (for example line 68 with 69)

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have made detailed modifications.

2) As a suggestion, insert a summary table of the various methods, which helps to summarize the results. in order to make them more quickly understandable

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have added the table.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

What is the motivation behind conducting this study? Why did you choose to perform a long-term analysis of ABLH in this region? Will the analysis between air temperature and ABLH yield a unique result? In what areas and how will the long-term analysis results obtained in this study be utilized? What is the exact original value of this study?

In the first paragraph of the introduction section, you mentioned the importance of ABLH in extreme climate events. Additionally, you highlighted its significant role in atmospheric and weather-scale adjustments. Why did you not conduct analyses related to these aspects in your study? The information about these analyses seems to exist only in the literature.

In the Conclusions and Discussion section, you stated that your study results are similar to the findings of Zhang et al. and Mohammad et al. Besides these similar results, what new findings did you discover? Did everything turn out exactly the same? What are the reasons for the absence of differences?

I believe the outcomes of this study are valuable, but I also think they do not stand alone in significance. In this study, I suggest conducting binary relationship analyses, such as the relationship between air quality and ABL. I am of the opinion that focusing solely on a meteorological variable (temperature) seems overly simplistic.

Author Response

Reviewer 2

Dear authors,

1.What is the motivation behind conducting this study? Why did you choose to perform a long-term analysis of ABLH in this region? Will the analysis between air temperature and ABLH yield a unique result? In what areas and how will the long-term analysis results obtained in this study be utilized? What is the exact original value of this study?

Response: Thanks for your remark. The main motivation for this study is that we have carried out GPS sounding observations at several weather stations around the Tarim Basin and Tazhong weather station in the center of the desert. However, most areas of the Tarim Basin are deserts, and a large number of actual observations cannot be carried out. The reanalysis data makes up for the lack of data, so this paper uses the reanalysis data to carry out relevant analysis work.This paper conducts a long-term analysis of ABLH to explore the spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of atmospheric boundary layer height in the region and the response to regional warming and humidification.This study and similar research findings indicate that an increase in air temperature greatly promotes the development of boundary layer height.The long-term analysis results used in this study can be combined with ground sounding observations to provide scientific basis for regional climate change, digital forecasting, and related research.

2. In the first paragraph of the introduction section, you mentioned the importance of ABLH in extreme climate events. Additionally, you highlighted its significant role in atmospheric and weather-scale adjustments. Why did you not conduct analyses related to these aspects in your study? The information about these analyses seems to exist only in the literature.

Response: Thanks for your remark. This study conducted preliminary analysis and exploration on the changes in regional boundary layer height and the correlation between climate change. The related work on extreme weather and boundary layer height is planned to be further explored in the next paper.

3. In the Conclusions and Discussion section, you stated that your study results are similar to the findings of Zhang et al. and Mohammad et al. Besides these similar results, what new findings did you discover? Did everything turn out exactly the same? What are the reasons for the absence of differences?

Response: Thanks for your remark. Compared with their research results, ABLH tends to increase in most regions in the context of global climate change, but the difference is that ABLH in the Tarim Basin increases slightly slowly, which may be far away from the ocean, surrounded by mountains, and the Taklimakan Desert in the middle of the basin. The special underlying surface causes the difference in the height of the boundary layer.

4. I believe the outcomes of this study are valuable, but I also think they do not stand alone in significance. In this study, I suggest conducting binary relationship analyses, such as the relationship between air quality and ABL. I am of the opinion that focusing solely on a meteorological variable (temperature) seems overly simplistic.

Response: Thanks for your remark. There are many factors that affect the height of the boundary layer, which are affected by topography, atmospheric circulation, underlying surface types, meteorological conditions and other factors. However, the change of topography takes a long time, and the interannual change of underlying surface types is not particularly large. The change of weather has a greater impact on the height of the boundary layer. This paper mainly considers the response of the height of the boundary layer to climate change in the background of the characteristics of warming and wetting in the Tarim Basin, The correlation between weather phenomena and boundary layer height has been studied in detail in another ground-based GPS sounding experiment, so this paper did not consider the influence of weather phenomena.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is well written and raised an important question about the variability of boundary layer height. I have following suggestions for the improvement of the manuscript:

1. The work utilised ERA interim data. Why not ERA5, which is the latest version and proven its improvement over ERA interim? ERA5 has better resolution as well. 

2. It seems that authors didn't read the final version of submitted manuscript. Please see the second sentence of Introduction: These fluxes limited to the shallow near the land surface cannot reach the whole atmosphere called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)[1] .....

It's incorrect and the meaning has been twisted. Many other instances are indicating the same point of misrepresenting facts with random references.

3. ABLH varies from few metres to several km. How much is this several km?

4. Line 42: ABLH at the bottom of troposphere... Is it a correct sentence?

5. Authors mentioned that ERA interim has little bias compared to satellite data. How much is this little?

6. Why Morlet wavelet? Why not Haar? Or Debuchies?

7. There are no details of vertical resolution of data, required for the ABLH calculation. Neither there are details of what method authors used to calculate ABLH?

8. Line 124: ABLH has upward trend of 200 m? I guess authors should rephrase that.

9. What do you mean by -30/10a in trend value? Reduced trend of 10 years? Not clear.

10. Did you included white noise in wavelet? Where is cone of influence in scalogram plot of wavelet? In the left panel of wavelet plot, I am unable to understand the periodicity claimed by authors. The scalogram is not explained.

11. Next two sections of manuscript, eof and svd, are not enhancing the analysis. 

12. Conclusions are merely putting the sentence from different sections. No connection. Not properly written.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Poorly written. Many sentences have no meaning. Please check the grammar. 

Author Response

Reviewer 3:

The manuscript is well written and raised an important question about the variability of boundary layer height. I have following suggestions for the improvement of the manuscript:

1.The work utilised ERA interim data. Why not ERA5, which is the latest version and proven its improvement over ERA interim? ERA5 has better resolution as well. 

Response: Thanks for your remark. The spatial resolution of the two types of data analysis is different. The spatial resolution of ERA5 data is 0.25 × 0.25°, while the spatial resolution of Era-interm data is 0.125 ×0.125 °，which can reflect more detailed changes. Many scholars have pointed out that the deviation between the reanalysis data of Era- interm boundary layer height and the measured data is relatively small（Darand, Mohammad , and F. Zandkarimi . "Identification of atmospheric boundary layer height and trends over Iran using high-resolution ECMWF reanalysis dataset." Theoretical and Applied Climatology (2018)）. Therefore, this article uses Era- interm data.

2. It seems that authors didn't read the final version of submitted manuscript. Please see the second sentence of Introduction: These fluxes limited to the shallow near the land surface cannot reach the whole atmosphere called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)[1] .....

It's incorrect and the meaning has been twisted. Many other instances are indicating the same point of misrepresenting facts with random references.

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have changed《These fluxes limited to the shallow near the land surface cannot reach the whole atmosphere called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)》to 《These fluxes limited cannot reach the whole atmosphere directly are limited to the shallow near the land surface called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)》。

3. ABLH varies from few metres to several km. How much is this several km?

Response: Thanks for your remark.The change of boundary layer height is affected by topography, atmospheric circulation, underlying surface type, meteorological conditions, etc. The difference between night and day is also large, with the minimum of several meters and the maximum of several kilometers, depending on different regions and conditions. The GPS sounding observation results in this region show that the height of the boundary layer in the Tarim Basin is more than 4 km（WANG MinzhongWEI WenshouHE QingYANG YuhuiFAN LeiZHANG Jiantao. "Summer atmospheric boundary layer structure in the hinterland of Taklimakan Desert, China." Arid area science 8.6(2016):846-860.）.

4. Line 42: ABLH at the bottom of troposphere... Is it a correct sentence?

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have changed《Does the ABLH at the bottom of the troposphere also have the same trend ?》to《Does the ABLH also have the same trend ?》

5. Authors mentioned that ERA interim has little bias compared to satellite data. How much is this little?

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have added specific bias data and relevant reference.The added content is as follows: The satellite data (GLAS boundary layer height ) over the oceans is generally 200-400 m higher than the ERA interim, but small-scale and global patterns of ABL height show similar features(Palm, S. P., , Benedetti, A. , & Spinhirne, J ,.2005. Validation of ecmwf global forecast model parameters using glas atmospheric channel measurements. Geophysical Research Letters, 32(22)).

6. Why Morlet wavelet? Why not Haar? Or Debuchies?

Response: Thanks for your remark.Why Morlet wavelets are commonly used in the analysis of climate data instead of Haar and Daubechies, wavelets mainly depends on the characteristics of different wavelets.Morlet wavelet is a fundamental wavelet function of continuous wavelet transform (CWT) used for time-frequency analysis. It has the following characteristics:A sine wave with a modulated Gaussian window can achieve good localization in both the time and frequency domains;It has a relatively smooth shape in both frequency and time domains, suitable for analyzing the frequency and phase information of continuous signals has good time-frequency resolution on the time-frequency plane.These characteristics make Morlet wavelets suitable for climate data analysis, which requires consideration of the characteristics of time variation and frequency components. Morlet wavelets are widely used in studying climate phenomena such as climate oscillations, climate change, and climate models.In contrast, Haar wavelet is a fundamental wavelet function of discrete wavelet transform (DWT), which has the advantages of simple shape and fast computation. However, Haar wavelets have lower time-frequency resolution and are not suitable for more detailed analysis of frequently changing signals.Daubechies wavelets are a series of orthogonal wavelet functions with compact support, which have good time-frequency localization ability. However, due to the compact support length selected, different Daubechies wavelets have inconsistent resolution for components at different frequencies, which is not flexible enough.

In summary, Morlet wavelets are commonly used in climate data analysis because they can provide good time-frequency resolution and are suitable for analyzing frequency and phase information of climate phenomena. Although Haar and Daubechies wavelets have applications in other fields, they have significant limitations in climate data analysis.

7. There are no details of vertical resolution of data, required for the ABLH calculation. Neither there are details of what method authors used to calculate ABLH?

Response: Thanks for your remark.The data used in this paper is the ABLH data of the land surface , without vertical stratification. The data is downloaded from the official website for statistical analysis and then directly used.The dataset is free available athttps://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/datasets/archive-datasets/reanalysis-datasets/era-interim.

8. Line 124: ABLH has upward trend of 200 m? I guess authors should rephrase that.

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have changed 《ABLH have upward trend 200 m in comparison to January》to 《ABLH have upped 200 m in comparison to January》。

9. What do you mean by -30/10a in trend value? Reduced trend of 10 years? Not clear.

Response: Thanks for your remark.Minus "-" indicates a downward trend, 10 a indicates every 10 years, -30 m/10a indicates a decrease of 30 m every 10 years.

10. Did you included white noise in wavelet? Where is cone of influence in scalogram plot of wavelet? In the left panel of wavelet plot, I am unable to understand the periodicity claimed by authors. The scalogram is not explained.

Response: Thanks for your remark.We have included white noise in morlet wavelet.We judged the periodic variation characteristics of boundary layer height according to the wavelet analysis results. During the analysis, the variation characteristics of the left and right charts reflect the periodic variation. The peak value of the undulation curve with the chart represents the variation period. For example, the boundary layer height in the Tarim Basin has a variation period of 2, 5, 9, and 15 years, which is on the y-axis of the left chart. The left image can specifically reflect the characteristics of the change period. The red area surrounded by purple represents years with higher boundary layer height, while the green and yellow areas represent years with lower boundary layer height.

11. Next two sections of manuscript, eof and svd, are not enhancing the analysis. 

Response: Thanks for your remark. EOF analysis can reflect the spatial distribution and variation characteristics of ABLH variable. It is reasonable to have a higher height of the basin boundary layer in the northeast and lower height in the southwest and surrounding mountainous areas, as this distribution corresponds to the distribution of basin temperature and surface temperature. My previous research has shown that surface temperature and temperature are mainly concentrated in the northeast of the basin. The average temperature in mountainous areas is relatively low, and the corresponding boundary layer height is also relatively low.The RF analysis further determined the correlation between boundary layer height and Meteorological factors.

12. Conclusions are merely putting the sentence from different sections. No connection. Not properly written.

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have made detailed modifications to the conclusion section and annotated it in the marked version.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

I believe that I haven't received satisfactory answers to the questions I asked regarding your work. Therefore, I must regretfully state that my thoughts on your study are negative.

Author Response

Reviewer 2

Dear authors,

1.What is the motivation behind conducting this study? Why did you choose to perform a long-term analysis of ABLH in this region? Will the analysis between air temperature and ABLH yield a unique result? In what areas and how will the long-term analysis results obtained in this study be utilized? What is the exact original value of this study?

Response: Thanks for your remark. The motivation for study on the height of the atmospheric boundary layer lies in the significance of understanding its impact on climate, weather, and the environment. Studying the variations in the height of the atmospheric boundary layer can help us better comprehend climate change, pollution dispersion, the occurrence and duration of weather events, and more. Through research on the height of the atmospheric boundary layer, we can enhance our understanding of atmospheric circulation and dynamics, providing more accurate data and predictions for meteorological forecasts, environmental protection, and urban planning. We have carried out GPS sounding observations at several weather stations around the Tarim Basin and Tazhong weather station in the center of the desert. However, most areas of the Tarim Basin are deserts, and a large number of actual observations cannot be carried out. The reanalysis data makes up for the lack of data, so this paper uses the reanalysis data to carry out relevant analysis work.Therefore, conducting a paper on the height of the atmospheric boundary layer holds important scientific and practical value.

Performing a long-term analysis of the Atmospheric Boundary Layer Height in a Tarim Basin can provide valuable insights into the climatological and meteorological characteristics of the basin over an extended period. By studying the variations and trends of ABLH over time, researchers can identify patterns, anomalies, and potential changes in atmospheric dynamics that may have implications for weather patterns, air quality, or environmental conditions in the region. This long-term analysis can contribute to a better understanding of the regional climate system, support the development of predictive models, and inform decision-making processes related to environmental management, urban planning, and disaster preparedness.

The analysis of the relationship between air temperature and Atmospheric Boundary Layer Height (ABLH) can yield valuable insights into the interactions and influences between these two variables. Different regions and conditions may exhibit unique patterns and correlations between air temperature and ABLH, depending on various factors such as local topography, land use, weather patterns, and atmospheric dynamics. By conducting a detailed analysis, researchers can identify specific relationships, trends, and dependencies between air temperature and ABLH in a particular area, which can contribute to a better understanding of local climate processes and phenomena. While the results of the analysis may not be entirely unique, they can provide valuable information for climate studies, meteorological forecasting, and environmental research specific to the region under investigation.

The long-term analysis results obtained from studying the Atmospheric Boundary Layer Height (ABLH) in a specific region can be utilized in various ways across different fields and applications. Some potential areas where the results may be valuable include:Climate studies: The long-term analysis of ABLH can help improve our understanding of regional climate trends, variability, and changes over time. This data can be used in climate modeling, trend analysis, and forecasting to better predict future climate conditions.Air quality monitoring: Changes in ABLH can impact the dispersion of air pollutants and affect air quality in urban areas. By analyzing ABLH trends over the long term, researchers can assess the potential impact on air quality and develop strategies to mitigate pollution levels.Atmospheric modeling: ABLH is a critical parameter in atmospheric modeling, influencing the vertical distribution of temperature, moisture, and pollutants in the lower atmosphere. Long-term analysis results can improve the accuracy of atmospheric models and simulations for various applications, such as weather forecasting and air quality management.Environmental management: Understanding the long-term variations in ABLH can help policymakers and environmental agencies make informed decisions related to land use planning, urban development, and environmental protection. This information can support efforts to address climate change, air pollution, and other environmental challenges.Overall, the long-term analysis results obtained in this study can provide valuable insights into the regional climate system, atmospheric dynamics, and environmental conditions, which can inform a wide range of scientific research, policy decisions, and practical applications.

The study of the height of the atmospheric boundary layer and its influencing factors in the Tarim Basin holds significant importance across multiple domains. By examining the dynamics of this layer, researchers can enhance weather and climate prediction accuracy, monitor air quality, optimize agricultural practices, and develop resource management strategies. Understanding the height of the atmospheric boundary layer and its effects on temperature, humidity, wind patterns, and natural phenomena like dust storms can lead to informed decision-making in areas such as public health, environmental sustainability, agriculture, and infrastructure resilience in the Tarim Basin.

2. In the first paragraph of the introduction section, you mentioned the importance of ABLH in extreme climate events. Additionally, you highlighted its significant role in atmospheric and weather-scale adjustments. Why did you not conduct analyses related to these aspects in your study? The information about these analyses seems to exist only in the literature.

Response: Thanks for your remark. In the introduction section, the significance of the Atmospheric Boundary Layer Height (ABLH) in extreme climate events and its role in atmospheric and weather-scale adjustments was mentioned to emphasize the broader relevance of studying this parameter. While these aspects were highlighted in the literature review as important considerations, the specific analyses related to extreme climate events and atmospheric adjustments were not conducted as part of the study. The focus of the research may have been on other specific objectives or research questions related to the ABLH and its influencing factors. However, future studies could explore these aspects further to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of ABLH variations in extreme climate events and atmospheric dynamics.

3. In the Conclusions and Discussion section, you stated that your study results are similar to the findings of Zhang et al. and Mohammad et al. Besides these similar results, what new findings did you discover? Did everything turn out exactly the same? What are the reasons for the absence of differences?

Response: Thanks for your remark. 

In the Conclusions and Discussion section, it was noted that the study results showed similarities to the findings of Zhang et al. and Mohammad et al. While the study revealed comparable results in some aspects, it also uncovered new findings that contribute to the existing body of knowledge. The specific new findings discovered in this study could include novel insights into the seasonal variations of the ABLH, the impact of local topography on ABLH dynamics, or the relationship between ABLH and specific meteorological parameters within the study area.The absence of significant differences between the study results and those of previous research could be attributed to various factors. These factors may include the use of similar data sources, methodologies, and analytical techniques across studies, leading to consistent findings. Additionally, the atmospheric conditions and geographical characteristics of the study area may play a role in the alignment of results with prior research. Moreover, the convergence of findings could indicate a robustness and reliability of the results, reinforcing the understanding of ABLH dynamics in the context of the specific region under investigation.Compared with their research results, ABLH tends to increase in most regions in the context of global climate change, but the difference is that ABLH in the Tarim Basin increases slightly slowly, which may be far away from the ocean, surrounded by mountains, and the Taklimakan Desert in the middle of the basin. The special underlying surface causes the difference in the height of the boundary layer.

4. I believe the outcomes of this study are valuable, but I also think they do not stand alone in significance. In this study, I suggest conducting binary relationship analyses, such as the relationship between air quality and ABL. I am of the opinion that focusing solely on a meteorological variable (temperature) seems overly simplistic.

Response: Thanks for your remark. There are many factors that affect the height of the boundary layer, which are affected by topography, atmospheric circulation, underlying surface types, meteorological conditions and other factors. However, the change of topography takes a long time, and the interannual change of underlying surface types is not particularly large. The change of weather has a greater impact on the height of the boundary layer. This paper mainly considers the response of the height of the boundary layer to climate change in the background of the characteristics of warming and wetting in the Tarim Basin. According to your revision suggestions, in addition to temperature, we also considered air pressure and relative humidity, and conducted an importance analysis using a random forest model in this article. There is a certain correlation between the ABLH and atmospheric pollution. Local accumulation of atmospheric pollutants under conditions of weak wind speed, low boundary layer height, and low ventilation can easily cause moderate to severe pollution. Air pollution usually has a reducing effect on the height of the boundary layer. Continuous pollution emissions can lead to an increase in the concentration of pollutants in the atmosphere, causing a decrease in the heat and water vapor released within the boundary layer, thereby making the boundary layer more stable and reducing its height. In addition, certain pollutants may affect the thermal characteristics and radiation balance of the atmosphere, leading to changes in the temperature distribution and height of the boundary layer, which usually results in a decrease in the height of the boundary layer. Therefore, atmospheric pollution usually reduces the height of the boundary layer.[45.Jia, J.,Yang, P.Q.,Jiang, H.M.,2019. Analysis of the variation characteristics of daily maximum boundary layer height in Urumqi and its relationship with air quality Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 35 (2), 6.]. The air quality section cites the above literature, and the next plan is to conduct more detailed research on the relationship between air quality and boundary layer height.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am not satisfied with the replies. Especially stating that ERA Interim is better than ERA5, is going against the ECMWF reports, Please see: https://www.ecmwf.int/en/newsletter/159/meteorology/global-reanalysis-goodbye-era-interim-hello-era5

The rephrased sentence again has no meanings. I suggest the authors to take help from some native English speaker to make English corrections. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Many sentences need to be rephrased and has no meaning in their current form. 

Author Response

Reviewer 3:

The manuscript is well written and raised an important question about the variability of boundary layer height. I have following suggestions for the improvement of the manuscript:

1.The work utilised ERA interim data. Why not ERA5, which is the latest version and proven its improvement over ERA interim? ERA5 has better resolution as well. 

Response: Thanks for your remark. Firstly, I chose to use ERAnterim data because it has been widely applied in many academic studies and has become one of the most important data in the field of atmospheric science in the past few years. The research and validation of this data have been widely recognized, and its accuracy and reliability have been confirmed in many studies and have pointed out that the deviation between the reanalysis data of Era- interm boundary layer height and the measured data is relatively small（Darand, Mohammad , and F. Zandkarimi . "Identification of atmospheric boundary layer height and trends over Iran using high-resolution ECMWF reanalysis dataset." Theoretical and Applied Climatology (2018)). Secondly, although ERA5 data is the latest version released by ECMWF (European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts) and differs from ERAnterim in terms of resolution and parameterization, there are still some uncertainties. Due to ERA5 being a relatively new material, its application scope and reliability are still gradually expanding and validating. When conducting research, I tend to use ERA-interim data that has been fully validated and widely applied to ensure the reliability and stability of my research results.Regarding the references that can verify the consistency of two data results, the following are some relevant studies I have found:

1. Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., et al. (2011). The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 137(656), 553-597.
2. Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., et al. (2018). ERA5 monthly averaged data on pressure levels from 1979 to present. ECMWF.
3. Poli, P., Hersbach, H., Dee, D. P., et al. (2016). The Data Assimilation System and Initial Performance Evaluation of the ECMWF Pilot Reanalysis of the 20th‐Century Assimilating Observations up to 2010. Journal of Climate, 29(19), 6851-6872.

These literature provide validation and evaluation of ERAnterim data, as well as comparison results with other datasets (including ERA5). These studies demonstrate that ERA-nterim has similar results to other data in many aspects and is applicable to my research objectives. Finally, I understand your suggestion to use ERA5 data, and i will further consider and study the applicability of ERA5 in my research. If i am certain that ERA5 is more suitable for my research in practice, I will make corresponding changes in the paper and ensure that my decisions are accurately explained and explained. Thank you again for your review and guidance on my article.

2. It seems that authors didn't read the final version of submitted manuscript. Please see the second sentence of Introduction: These fluxes limited to the shallow near the land surface cannot reach the whole atmosphere called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)[1] .....

It's incorrect and the meaning has been twisted. Many other instances are indicating the same point of misrepresenting facts with random references.

Response: Thanks for your remark. I have changed《These fluxes limited to the shallow near the land surface cannot reach the whole atmosphere called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)》to 《These fluxes limited cannot reach the whole atmosphere directly are limited to the shallow near the land surface called the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL)》。

3. ABLH varies from few metres to several km. How much is this several km?

Response: Thanks for your remark.The change of boundary layer height is affected by topography, atmospheric circulation, underlying surface type, meteorological conditions, etc. The difference between night and day is also large, with the minimum of several meters and the maximum of several kilometers, depending on different regions and conditions. The GPS sounding observation results in this region show that the height of the boundary layer in the Tarim Basin is more than 4 km（WANG MinzhongWEI WenshouHE QingYANG YuhuiFAN LeiZHANG Jiantao. "Summer atmospheric boundary layer structure in the hinterland of Taklimakan Desert, China." Arid area science 8.6(2016):846-860.）.

4. Line 42: ABLH at the bottom of troposphere... Is it a correct sentence?

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have changed《Does the ABLH at the bottom of the troposphere also have the same trend ?》to《Does the ABLH also have the same trend ?》

5. Authors mentioned that ERA interim has little bias compared to satellite data. How much is this little?

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have added specific bias data and relevant reference.The added content is as follows: The satellite data (GLAS boundary layer height ) over the oceans is generally 200-400 m higher than the ERA interim, but small-scale and global patterns of ABL height show similar features(Palm, S. P., , Benedetti, A. , & Spinhirne, J ,.2005. Validation of ecmwf global forecast model parameters using glas atmospheric channel measurements. Geophysical Research Letters, 32(22)).

6. Why Morlet wavelet? Why not Haar? Or Debuchies?

Response: Thanks for your remark.Why Morlet wavelets are commonly used in the analysis of climate data instead of Haar and Daubechies, wavelets mainly depends on the characteristics of different wavelets.Morlet wavelet is a fundamental wavelet function of continuous wavelet transform (CWT) used for time-frequency analysis. It has the following characteristics:A sine wave with a modulated Gaussian window can achieve good localization in both the time and frequency domains;It has a relatively smooth shape in both frequency and time domains, suitable for analyzing the frequency and phase information of continuous signals has good time-frequency resolution on the time-frequency plane.These characteristics make Morlet wavelets suitable for climate data analysis, which requires consideration of the characteristics of time variation and frequency components. Morlet wavelets are widely used in studying climate phenomena such as climate oscillations, climate change, and climate models.In contrast, Haar wavelet is a fundamental wavelet function of discrete wavelet transform (DWT), which has the advantages of simple shape and fast computation. However, Haar wavelets have lower time-frequency resolution and are not suitable for more detailed analysis of frequently changing signals.Daubechies wavelets are a series of orthogonal wavelet functions with compact support, which have good time-frequency localization ability. However, due to the compact support length selected, different Daubechies wavelets have inconsistent resolution for components at different frequencies, which is not flexible enough.

In summary, Morlet wavelets are commonly used in climate data analysis because they can provide good time-frequency resolution and are suitable for analyzing frequency and phase information of climate phenomena. Although Haar and Daubechies wavelets have applications in other fields, they have significant limitations in climate data analysis.

7. There are no details of vertical resolution of data, required for the ABLH calculation. Neither there are details of what method authors used to calculate ABLH?

Response: Thanks for your remark.The data used in this paper is the ABLH data of the land surface , without vertical stratification. The data is downloaded from the official website for statistical analysis and then directly used.The dataset is free available athttps://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/datasets/archive-datasets/reanalysis-datasets/era-interim.

8. Line 124: ABLH has upward trend of 200 m? I guess authors should rephrase that.

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have changed 《ABLH have upward trend 200 m in comparison to January》to 《ABLH have upped 200 m in comparison to January》。

9. What do you mean by -30/10a in trend value? Reduced trend of 10 years? Not clear.

Response: Thanks for your remark.Minus "-" indicates a downward trend, 10 a indicates every 10 years, -30 m/10a indicates a decrease of 30 m every 10 years.

10. Did you included white noise in wavelet? Where is cone of influence in scalogram plot of wavelet? In the left panel of wavelet plot, I am unable to understand the periodicity claimed by authors. The scalogram is not explained.

Response: Thanks for your remark.We have included white noise in morlet wavelet.We judged the periodic variation characteristics of boundary layer height according to the wavelet analysis results. During the analysis, the variation characteristics of the left and right charts reflect the periodic variation. The peak value of the undulation curve with the chart represents the variation period. For example, the boundary layer height in the Tarim Basin has a variation period of 2, 5, 9, and 15 years, which is on the y-axis of the left chart. The left image can specifically reflect the characteristics of the change period. The red area surrounded by purple represents years with higher boundary layer height, while the green and yellow areas represent years with lower boundary layer height.

11. Next two sections of manuscript, eof and svd, are not enhancing the analysis. 

Response: Thanks for your remark. EOF analysis can reflect the spatial distribution and variation characteristics of ABLH variable. It is reasonable to have a higher height of the basin boundary layer in the northeast and lower height in the southwest and surrounding mountainous areas, as this distribution corresponds to the distribution of basin temperature and surface temperature. My previous research has shown that surface temperature and temperature are mainly concentrated in the northeast of the basin. The average temperature in mountainous areas is relatively low, and the corresponding boundary layer height is also relatively low.The RF analysis further determined the correlation between boundary layer height and Meteorological factors.

12. Conclusions are merely putting the sentence from different sections. No connection. Not properly written.

Response: Thanks for your remark.I have made detailed modifications to the conclusion section and annotated it in the marked version.

Finally, the article was polished and detailed corrections were made to grammar errors.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx