the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Improving the thermocline calculation over the global ocean
Abstract. According to the typical thermal structure of the ocean, the water column can be divided into three layers: the mixing layer, the thermocline and the deep layer. In this study, we provide a new methodology, based on a function adjustment on the temperature profile, to locate the minimum and maximum depths of the thermocline, and therefore its thickness, to separate the water column into layers. We first validated our methodology by comparing the mixed layer depth obtained with the method proposed here with that of two previous studies. Since we found a very good agreement between the three methods we used the function adjustment to compute the monthly climatologies of the mixed layer depth, the maximum depth of the thermocline and the thermocline thickness, throughout the ocean. We also provide an assessment of the regions of the ocean where our adjustment is valid, and consequently the regions where the thermal structure of the ocean follows the three-layer structure. However, there are ocean regions where the water column cannot be separated into three layers due to the dynamic processes that alter it and the major contribution of salinity to stratification. This assessment highlights the limitations of the existing methods to accurately determine the mixed layer depth and the thermocline in oceanic regions that are particularly turbulent as the Southern Ocean and the northern North Atlantic, among others. The method proposed here has shown to be robust and easy to apply, and it can be used in both local and global studies.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(5069 KB)
-
Supplement
(815 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(5069 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(815 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-788', Anonymous Referee #1, 29 Nov 2022
General comment:
This paper proposed a new method for determining the upper and lower bounds of the thermocline. The method applies the sigmoid function to fit the Argo temperature profiles, then locates the mixed layer depth (MLD) and maximum thermocline depth (MTD) by using a temperature threshold (0.2â). The authors provided convincing evidence that the new method can determine similar MLD as the other two widely used methods (HT09 and B04). Next, they presented the global climatology of thermocline thickness and characterized their distribution patterns. The method is easy to conduct, and the MLD and MTD can be calculated as promised in the paper, although some details need to be reconsidered. The paper is well organized with a clear presentation, and I believe the new method is of great value to the readers and will help oceanographers who are interested in calculating MTD, after some adjustments.
Major comment:
- The authors used R2 as the criterion for the goodness of fitting, while R2 values can be high even if the fitting functions don’t fit the data well.
- The examples shown in Figure 1 in the manuscript are all partial profiles, which can be misleading because it is unknown to the readers whether the thermoclines are fully included. Also, in Figure 1 the thermoclines are all thin, less than 100 m. When it comes to thick thermoclines, such as shown in the figure of the supplement file, the thermocline lies between ~50 m to ~400 m, and it is possible that the depth of twice the maximum N2 doesn’t cover the thermocline. The deep layer is not captured by the fitting in the supplement figure, and thus the MTD result is much shallower than the actual one. However, if the upper 500 m profile is used to perform the fitting, the upper mixed layer can not be well captured (figure not shown). The fitting depth range should be reconsidered to better present the features of temperature profiles.
Minor comment:
Line 1: “… divided into three layers: the mixed layer …”
Line 34: “plays a key role …”
Line 51: “Previous regional studies have identified a shallowing and strengthening thermocline in …”
Line 59: the meaning of MTD is not given.
Line 214: “…500 m in the core …”
Line 239: “… three main layers: the mixed layer …”
Line 283-284: “and only gave good results with profiles located in tropical latitudes” is repeated twice.
Line 313: “… minimum and maximum depths of …”
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 24 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-788/egusphere-2022-788-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 24 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-788/egusphere-2022-788-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 24 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-788/egusphere-2022-788-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-788', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Feb 2023
The complete review is joined hereunder in a pdf file.
- AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 02 Mar 2023
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-788', Anonymous Referee #1, 29 Nov 2022
General comment:
This paper proposed a new method for determining the upper and lower bounds of the thermocline. The method applies the sigmoid function to fit the Argo temperature profiles, then locates the mixed layer depth (MLD) and maximum thermocline depth (MTD) by using a temperature threshold (0.2â). The authors provided convincing evidence that the new method can determine similar MLD as the other two widely used methods (HT09 and B04). Next, they presented the global climatology of thermocline thickness and characterized their distribution patterns. The method is easy to conduct, and the MLD and MTD can be calculated as promised in the paper, although some details need to be reconsidered. The paper is well organized with a clear presentation, and I believe the new method is of great value to the readers and will help oceanographers who are interested in calculating MTD, after some adjustments.
Major comment:
- The authors used R2 as the criterion for the goodness of fitting, while R2 values can be high even if the fitting functions don’t fit the data well.
- The examples shown in Figure 1 in the manuscript are all partial profiles, which can be misleading because it is unknown to the readers whether the thermoclines are fully included. Also, in Figure 1 the thermoclines are all thin, less than 100 m. When it comes to thick thermoclines, such as shown in the figure of the supplement file, the thermocline lies between ~50 m to ~400 m, and it is possible that the depth of twice the maximum N2 doesn’t cover the thermocline. The deep layer is not captured by the fitting in the supplement figure, and thus the MTD result is much shallower than the actual one. However, if the upper 500 m profile is used to perform the fitting, the upper mixed layer can not be well captured (figure not shown). The fitting depth range should be reconsidered to better present the features of temperature profiles.
Minor comment:
Line 1: “… divided into three layers: the mixed layer …”
Line 34: “plays a key role …”
Line 51: “Previous regional studies have identified a shallowing and strengthening thermocline in …”
Line 59: the meaning of MTD is not given.
Line 214: “…500 m in the core …”
Line 239: “… three main layers: the mixed layer …”
Line 283-284: “and only gave good results with profiles located in tropical latitudes” is repeated twice.
Line 313: “… minimum and maximum depths of …”
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 24 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-788/egusphere-2022-788-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 24 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-788/egusphere-2022-788-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 24 Dec 2022
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2022/egusphere-2022-788/egusphere-2022-788-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-788', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Feb 2023
The complete review is joined hereunder in a pdf file.
- AC4: 'Reply on RC2', Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez, 02 Mar 2023
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
466 | 280 | 23 | 769 | 56 | 9 | 8 |
- HTML: 466
- PDF: 280
- XML: 23
- Total: 769
- Supplement: 56
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Emmanuel Romero
Leonardo Tenorio-Fernandez
Esther Portela
Jorge Montes-Aréchiga
Laura Sánchez-Velasco
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(5069 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(815 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper