Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea

Li, Junyi; He, Tao; Zheng, Quanan; Xu, Ying; Xie, Lingling

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274

Preprints

https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274

Preprints

19 Jun 2023

| 19 Jun 2023

Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea

Junyi Li, Tao He, Quanan Zheng, Ying Xu, and Lingling Xie

Abstract. This study aims to analyze statistical behavior of the continental shelf wave motions, including continental shelf waves (CSWs) and arrested topographic waves (ATWs), in the northern South China Sea. The baseline consists of tidal gauge data from stations Kanmen, Xiamen, Shanwei, Hongkong, and Zhapo, as well as along-track sea level anomaly (SLA) data derived from multi-satellite altimeters from 1993 to 2020. The subtidal signals propagating along the coast with periods shorter than 40 d and phase speeds of about 10 m s^-1 are interpreted as CSWs. The cross-shelf structure of along-track SLA indicates that mode 1 of CSWs is the predominant component trapped in the area shallower than about 200 m. The amplitudes of CSWs reach the maximum 0.6 m during July–September, and minimum 0.2 m during April–June. The inter-seasonal and seasonal signals represent ATWs. The amplitudes of ATWs reach 0.10 m during October–December, twice of that during July–September. These observations are well interpreted by the framework of linear wave theory. The cross-shelf structures of CSWs and ATWs derived from along-track SLA illustrate that the methods are suitable for observing dynamic behavior of the CSWs.

Received: 12 Jun 2023 – Discussion started: 19 Jun 2023

Download & links

Preprint (PDF, 2519 KB)

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 (2519 KB)

Download & links

The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

09 Nov 2023

Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea

Junyi Li, Tao He, Quanan Zheng, Ying Xu, and Lingling Xie

Ocean Sci., 19, 1545–1559, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-19-1545-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/os-19-1545-2023, 2023

Short summary

Junyi Li et al.

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-1274', Anonymous Referee #1, 25 Jul 2023

General comments:

This study employs tidal gauge and remote sensing data to investigate the statistical characteristics of continental shelf waves in the northern South China Sea. The topic should be of interest to those who focus on the coastal dynamics. I’ve identified some points below which might help. I’m recommending a major revision before it can be published.

Specific comments:

1. According to Wang and Mooers (1976) as well as Brink (1991) and Huthnance (1995), the CSW and ATW referred in this manuscript should be more specified as Kelvin wave and topographic Rossby wave, respectively.

Wang, D., and C. N. K. Mooers, 1976: Coastal-trapped waves in a continuously stratified ocean. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 6, 853-863.
Brink, K. H., 1991: Coastal-trapped waves and wind-driven currents over the continental shelf. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 23, 389-412.
Huthnance, J. M., 1995: Circulation, exchange and water masses at the ocean margin: the role of physical processes at the shelf edge. Prog. Oceanogr., 35, 353-431.

2. The description of wavelet analysis in section 2.5 is not necessary because it is a method widely used in different studies.

3. By the way, it should be better to describe the theory of CSWs in section 2 rather than in section 4.

4. The EOF analysis may be a better tool to reveal the principal modes in Figs. 3 and 8.

5. The boundary conditions should be given in sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2.

6. Fig. 4 could be omitted because it is not helpful for the analysis and there are also few descriptions about it in the manuscript.

7. Since the authors have realized that the discrepancies in Fig. 7 may be owing to the wind forcing and baroclinicity, they had better include these effects in Eq. 6 and show the relevant dispersion curve for comparison.

8. The results shown in Fig. 9 suggest that the assumption at L260-264 is not proper for the reality.

Technical corrections:

1. L336: it should be (24).

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Junyi Li, 16 Aug 2023
  
  Please kindly find the attached file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-1274', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jul 2023

Review of “Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea”
Using a combination of tide-gauge and along-track altimeter data, this study examines the cross-shelf structures of continental shelf waves (CSWs) and arrested topographic waves (ATWs) in the northern South China Sea (SCS). I think it is very interesting to isolate CSWs and ATWs from observations according to their respective dynamics. The manuscript is overall well organized. In particular, I like the dynamic analysis illustrated in Section 4 and fitting the theoretical solutions to observed profiles. However, I think the manuscript could be further improved subject to taking into account several issues detailed below. I suggest a Major Revision in this round of review.
1. Introduction. Instead of very broadly describing sea level variations in the SCS and their relationship with for example ENSO, I think the authors should get quickly to the core content focused in this manuscript. For instance, the authors can review relevant studies on CSWs and ATWs in the China Seas or in global shelf seas, summarize the state-of-the-art understandings of general dynamics and regional oceanography, and propose outstanding issues particularly the ones that will be addressed in the present study. Also, listing a number of studies as in the second paragraph of Introduction is not an ideal way to summarize current understandings; rather, they should be organized in a sound and logic way.
2. Section 3.1 & Fig. 2. The authors identify sea level signals with periods shorter than 40 d as CSWs while those longer than 40 d as ATWs, and state that they “show remarkably different characteristics”. However, the remarkable difference is not clearly discernable from Fig. 2. In particular, I do not see evident discontinuity around the period 40 d in Fig. 2b. The authors need to illustrate more clearly what specifically the “remarkably different characteristics” Moreover, instead of showing all the resolved periods in a single panel, I suggest plotting certain period bands of interests in different panels with enlarged views of the details and adding auxiliary lines when needed to illustrate for example the content in L168-170.
3. This is related to the previous comment. I think the governing equations and wave solutions derived in Section 4 are more clearly for CSWs than for ATWs. This could be overcome by indicating ATWs more explicitly in Section 4.2. For example, making subsection titles of Section 4.1 and 4.2 more parallel (e.g., “Governing equations and wave solutions for CSWs/ATWs), explicitly indicating Eq. (21) is the solution for ATWs and Fig. 6 is the theoretical ATW profiles (rather than “normalized SSH ...”), etc. This would also help readers to more easily understand what theoretical ATWs refer to as described in L482.
4. L188-190. I understand that the China Seas are overwhelmed by northeasterly in winter and by southwesterly in summer. But coastal trapped waves (CTWs) should propagate equatorward (with the coast on the right side) in any season. How come seasonal signals at Xiamen would lead that at Kanmen in summer? In which form of coastal waves would sea level variability propagate poleward from Xiamen to Kanmen? Normally when wind direction is opposed to the propagation direction of CTWs (in summer for China Seas), alongshore wind would play a limited role in regulating coastal sea level variability downstream (in the sense of propagating CTWs).
Minor ones:
1. Lower, not higher, percent values of significant level mean more significant. So here I think it is “larger than”instead of “less than”.
2. L246-247. The “long-wave assumption”seems to assume that the cross-shelf length is much smaller than along-shelf length (l/L<<1). Why would it lead to du/dt=0?
3. Fig. 4 is not referenced in the main text.
4. L483-484. Descriptions in these two lines only apply to Track 12. Is this correct? If yes, this needs to be illustrated more clearly in the texts.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Junyi Li, 16 Aug 2023
  
  Please kindly find the attached file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-AC2
RC3:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-1274', Anonymous Referee #3, 30 Jul 2023

This paper examines sea-level variability in the South China Sea by using tide gauges and satellite altimetry data. The signals are interpreted as continental shelf waves (CSWs) and arrested topographic waves (ATWs). The submission reviewed many previous studies on sea level in the South China Sea, and aim to (1) extend observations offshore and among the tide gauges, and (2) resolve periods shorter than 10 d (the satellite orbit period). These aims are partially accomplished, but the analysis and presentation could be improved and clarified.
Minor comments:
(1) Line 108-111, there are two types of along-track SLA, i.e., SLA_unfiltered and SLA_filtered. Please clarify which kind of data in this submission has been used.
(2) Line 112, it is very important to discuss the availability of along-track SLA in the coastal zones.
References:
Birol F et al.. 2021 The X-TRACK/ALES multi-mission processing system: new advances in altimetry towards the coast. Adv. Space Res. 67, 2398-2415
Vignudelli S, Birol F, Benveniste J, Fu LL, Picot N, Raynal M, Roinard H. 2019 Satellite altimetry measurements of sea level in the coastal zone. Surv. Geophys. 40, 1319-1349.
(3) Fig. 3, give cross-shelf scales consistently in km instead of degree.
(4) Line 273, add Robinson (1964) shelf wave theory.
(5) Line 279, the simplified bathymetry in the analytical model is not very realistic in the the bathymetry of the SCS, especially in the deep ocean part. Why not use more complicated bathymetry, or realistic bathymetry by using a tool from Brink and Chapman (1985).
Brink, K. H., & Chapman, D. C. (1985). Programs for computing properties of coastal-trapped waves and wind-driven motions over the continental shelf and slope. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
(6) Fig. 6, add a decay scale of the Rossby radius of deformation.
(7) Fig. 7, lacks error bars.
(8) Data in station Kanmen was not discussed in this manuscript.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-RC3
- AC3: 'Reply on RC3', Junyi Li, 16 Aug 2023
  
  Please kindly find the attached file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-AC3

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-1274', Anonymous Referee #1, 25 Jul 2023

General comments:

This study employs tidal gauge and remote sensing data to investigate the statistical characteristics of continental shelf waves in the northern South China Sea. The topic should be of interest to those who focus on the coastal dynamics. I’ve identified some points below which might help. I’m recommending a major revision before it can be published.

Specific comments:

1. According to Wang and Mooers (1976) as well as Brink (1991) and Huthnance (1995), the CSW and ATW referred in this manuscript should be more specified as Kelvin wave and topographic Rossby wave, respectively.

Wang, D., and C. N. K. Mooers, 1976: Coastal-trapped waves in a continuously stratified ocean. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 6, 853-863.
Brink, K. H., 1991: Coastal-trapped waves and wind-driven currents over the continental shelf. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 23, 389-412.
Huthnance, J. M., 1995: Circulation, exchange and water masses at the ocean margin: the role of physical processes at the shelf edge. Prog. Oceanogr., 35, 353-431.

2. The description of wavelet analysis in section 2.5 is not necessary because it is a method widely used in different studies.

3. By the way, it should be better to describe the theory of CSWs in section 2 rather than in section 4.

4. The EOF analysis may be a better tool to reveal the principal modes in Figs. 3 and 8.

5. The boundary conditions should be given in sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2.

6. Fig. 4 could be omitted because it is not helpful for the analysis and there are also few descriptions about it in the manuscript.

7. Since the authors have realized that the discrepancies in Fig. 7 may be owing to the wind forcing and baroclinicity, they had better include these effects in Eq. 6 and show the relevant dispersion curve for comparison.

8. The results shown in Fig. 9 suggest that the assumption at L260-264 is not proper for the reality.

Technical corrections:

1. L336: it should be (24).

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Junyi Li, 16 Aug 2023
  
  Please kindly find the attached file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-1274', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jul 2023

Review of “Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea”
Using a combination of tide-gauge and along-track altimeter data, this study examines the cross-shelf structures of continental shelf waves (CSWs) and arrested topographic waves (ATWs) in the northern South China Sea (SCS). I think it is very interesting to isolate CSWs and ATWs from observations according to their respective dynamics. The manuscript is overall well organized. In particular, I like the dynamic analysis illustrated in Section 4 and fitting the theoretical solutions to observed profiles. However, I think the manuscript could be further improved subject to taking into account several issues detailed below. I suggest a Major Revision in this round of review.
1. Introduction. Instead of very broadly describing sea level variations in the SCS and their relationship with for example ENSO, I think the authors should get quickly to the core content focused in this manuscript. For instance, the authors can review relevant studies on CSWs and ATWs in the China Seas or in global shelf seas, summarize the state-of-the-art understandings of general dynamics and regional oceanography, and propose outstanding issues particularly the ones that will be addressed in the present study. Also, listing a number of studies as in the second paragraph of Introduction is not an ideal way to summarize current understandings; rather, they should be organized in a sound and logic way.
2. Section 3.1 & Fig. 2. The authors identify sea level signals with periods shorter than 40 d as CSWs while those longer than 40 d as ATWs, and state that they “show remarkably different characteristics”. However, the remarkable difference is not clearly discernable from Fig. 2. In particular, I do not see evident discontinuity around the period 40 d in Fig. 2b. The authors need to illustrate more clearly what specifically the “remarkably different characteristics” Moreover, instead of showing all the resolved periods in a single panel, I suggest plotting certain period bands of interests in different panels with enlarged views of the details and adding auxiliary lines when needed to illustrate for example the content in L168-170.
3. This is related to the previous comment. I think the governing equations and wave solutions derived in Section 4 are more clearly for CSWs than for ATWs. This could be overcome by indicating ATWs more explicitly in Section 4.2. For example, making subsection titles of Section 4.1 and 4.2 more parallel (e.g., “Governing equations and wave solutions for CSWs/ATWs), explicitly indicating Eq. (21) is the solution for ATWs and Fig. 6 is the theoretical ATW profiles (rather than “normalized SSH ...”), etc. This would also help readers to more easily understand what theoretical ATWs refer to as described in L482.
4. L188-190. I understand that the China Seas are overwhelmed by northeasterly in winter and by southwesterly in summer. But coastal trapped waves (CTWs) should propagate equatorward (with the coast on the right side) in any season. How come seasonal signals at Xiamen would lead that at Kanmen in summer? In which form of coastal waves would sea level variability propagate poleward from Xiamen to Kanmen? Normally when wind direction is opposed to the propagation direction of CTWs (in summer for China Seas), alongshore wind would play a limited role in regulating coastal sea level variability downstream (in the sense of propagating CTWs).
Minor ones:
1. Lower, not higher, percent values of significant level mean more significant. So here I think it is “larger than”instead of “less than”.
2. L246-247. The “long-wave assumption”seems to assume that the cross-shelf length is much smaller than along-shelf length (l/L<<1). Why would it lead to du/dt=0?
3. Fig. 4 is not referenced in the main text.
4. L483-484. Descriptions in these two lines only apply to Track 12. Is this correct? If yes, this needs to be illustrated more clearly in the texts.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Junyi Li, 16 Aug 2023
  
  Please kindly find the attached file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-AC2
RC3:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-1274', Anonymous Referee #3, 30 Jul 2023

This paper examines sea-level variability in the South China Sea by using tide gauges and satellite altimetry data. The signals are interpreted as continental shelf waves (CSWs) and arrested topographic waves (ATWs). The submission reviewed many previous studies on sea level in the South China Sea, and aim to (1) extend observations offshore and among the tide gauges, and (2) resolve periods shorter than 10 d (the satellite orbit period). These aims are partially accomplished, but the analysis and presentation could be improved and clarified.
Minor comments:
(1) Line 108-111, there are two types of along-track SLA, i.e., SLA_unfiltered and SLA_filtered. Please clarify which kind of data in this submission has been used.
(2) Line 112, it is very important to discuss the availability of along-track SLA in the coastal zones.
References:
Birol F et al.. 2021 The X-TRACK/ALES multi-mission processing system: new advances in altimetry towards the coast. Adv. Space Res. 67, 2398-2415
Vignudelli S, Birol F, Benveniste J, Fu LL, Picot N, Raynal M, Roinard H. 2019 Satellite altimetry measurements of sea level in the coastal zone. Surv. Geophys. 40, 1319-1349.
(3) Fig. 3, give cross-shelf scales consistently in km instead of degree.
(4) Line 273, add Robinson (1964) shelf wave theory.
(5) Line 279, the simplified bathymetry in the analytical model is not very realistic in the the bathymetry of the SCS, especially in the deep ocean part. Why not use more complicated bathymetry, or realistic bathymetry by using a tool from Brink and Chapman (1985).
Brink, K. H., & Chapman, D. C. (1985). Programs for computing properties of coastal-trapped waves and wind-driven motions over the continental shelf and slope. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
(6) Fig. 6, add a decay scale of the Rossby radius of deformation.
(7) Fig. 7, lacks error bars.
(8) Data in station Kanmen was not discussed in this manuscript.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-RC3
- AC3: 'Reply on RC3', Junyi Li, 16 Aug 2023
  
  Please kindly find the attached file.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1274-AC3

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

AR by Junyi Li on behalf of the Authors (16 Aug 2023) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (21 Aug 2023) by John M. Huthnance

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (23 Aug 2023)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (02 Sep 2023)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Review of “Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea” - Round 2

I think the revised manuscript is improved although the authors did not take all my suggestions. My second round of review on this manuscript continues to follow the line of my previous comments. I suggest a minor revision this time.

1. Introduction. The authors added some basics of continental shelf waves together with some references (the first two paragraph), which I think is fine. But I still think it is not necessary to talk about the relationship between sea level variations in the SCS with ENSO; the ENSO-related variability is not mentioned in the rest of the manuscript except the Introduction.

2. Fig. 5. The authors added two sentences in L323-327 of the revised manuscript, which do help me better understand the “remarkably different characteristics” between signals with periods shorter and longer than 40d. However, the authors seem to wrongly describe the left and right directions of the arrows, both in the manuscript and the response file. For example, I see from Fig. 5d that the arrow directions are primarily pointing “down-right”, instead of “bottom left” as stated in L324. (There are more such cases in the response file.) Also, the arrow directions seem more uniform in the enlarged version (Fig. 5d) than in the original full time range (Fig. 5c) for the period shorter than 40d. But even in Fig. 5d, the arrows are not “uniformly” displayed (e.g., the arrows point rightward at period ~16d from Jan to Feb 1994), then how do you obtain this constant lag period of 15h (L329) for signals at Xiamen and Kanmen?

3. Previously I suggest making the theoretical part for CSW and ATW more parallel, but the authors explain that this manuscript focuses on CSW and hence this part leans more toward CSW. I accept that.

Minor ones:
1. L51-52. motion -> motions, wave -> waves
2. L97. Change to “... a counterbalance of contributions from the along-shelf wind and bottom friction and well predicted by the ATW model”.
3. L271. Change to “The solution for SSH based on Eqs. (20a-c) is (Csanady, 1978)”
4. L324. “... point ... uniformly” -> “... generally/primarily point ...”
5. L325. uniform -> quasi-uniform
6. L326. While -> However
7. L326. “in the lower period band” -> “for the period band longer than 40 d”
8. L329. Kamen -> Kanmen

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (14 Sep 2023) by John M. Huthnance

Dear Authors
Thank-you for your responses to referee comments and for the revised manuscript. I now have two referees’ reviews of the revised manuscript. One is satisfied. The other asks for minor revision (see their comments below) and I have some detailed comments below which you should also please attend to.
Yours sincerely
John Huthnance (Editor)

Referee comments.
“I think the revised manuscript is improved although the authors did not take all my suggestions. My second round of review on this manuscript continues to follow the line of my previous comments. I suggest a minor revision this time.
1. Introduction. The authors added some basics of continental shelf waves together with some references (the first two paragraph), which I think is fine. But I still think it is not necessary to talk about the relationship between sea level variations in the SCS with ENSO; the ENSO-related variability is not mentioned in the rest of the manuscript except the Introduction.
(Editor: I agree. If you wish to keep this in the Introduction then you should have something new about the relation with ENSO also in the Discussion. I also agree with the following referee comments).
2. Fig. 5. The authors added two sentences in L323-327 of the revised manuscript, which do help me better understand the “remarkably different characteristics” between signals with periods shorter and longer than 40d. However, the authors seem to wrongly describe the left and right directions of the arrows, both in the manuscript and the response file. For example, I see from Fig. 5d that the arrow directions are primarily pointing “down-right”, instead of “bottom left” as stated in L324. (There are more such cases in the response file.) Also, the arrow directions seem more uniform in the enlarged version (Fig. 5d) than in the original full time range (Fig. 5c) for the period shorter than 40d. But even in Fig. 5d, the arrows are not “uniformly” displayed (e.g., the arrows point rightward at period ~16d from Jan to Feb 1994), then how do you obtain this constant lag period of 15h (L329) for signals at Xiamen and Kanmen?
3. Previously I suggest making the theoretical part for CSW and ATW more parallel, but the authors explain that this manuscript focuses on CSW and hence this part leans more toward CSW. I accept that.
Minor ones:
1. L51-52. motion -> motions, wave -> waves
2. L97. Change to “... a counterbalance of contributions from the along-shelf wind and bottom friction and well predicted by the ATW model”.
3. L271. Change to “The solution for SSH based on Eqs. (20a-c) is (Csanady, 1978)”
4. L324. “... point ... uniformly” -> “... generally/primarily point ...”
5. L325. uniform -> quasi-uniform
6. L326. While -> However
7. L326. “in the lower period band” -> “for the period band longer than 40 d”
8. L329. Kamen -> Kanmen

Detailed editor comments
Line 53. “Overall, . . .” This sentence should exclude flat bottom boundaries.
Lines 63, 101. “repeated” –> “repeat”.
Line 117. “repetition” –> “repeat”.
Line 124. “processed” –> “processes”
Line 176. You cannot say that “𝜕𝑢/𝜕𝑡 = 0” but you should summarise your response to review 1 Comment 6 that the scaling implies 𝜕𝑢/𝜕𝑡 << fv in (1a).
Line 255. “evolution” –> “structure” or “profile”.
Line 271. “becomes” –> “give”
Lines 283-284. This is confusing. I think best to omit “equal to the deformation radius, and” in line 283.
Line 318. You need to say which of Kanmen and Xiamen is leading (for pointing down) or lagging (for pointing up).
Line 326. “lower” –> “longer”
Line 414. “. . Even though one can see . .”
Lines 417-418. I think better “. . The sea level . . should show coastal trapped waves influenced by stratification.” There is only one set of waves (i.e. not “baroclinic and barotropic”) and your response Table 1 precludes “baroclinic . . CSWs” all the symbols, i.e. red crosses.
Line 434. “outliers at the 5 % significance level” is unclear. How exactly is an outlier defined?
Figure 8 caption needs to explain all symbols, i.e. extent of boxes, dashed lines and red crosses (better here than in the main text).
Lines 446-447. Better “The along-track SLA is averaged for each 15 km offshore”?
Please format Table 2 to optimise vertical alignment. Better “Maxi” –> “Max”, Mini –> “Min”.
Lines 464-465. “It should contain higher modes in the along-track SLA.” –> “The along-track SLA should contain higher modes.”?
Figure 10 caption. What is the green curve in panel h?
Line 538. Please define Peβ.

Hide

AR by Junyi Li on behalf of the Authors (18 Sep 2023) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (22 Sep 2023) by John M. Huthnance

Dear Authors
Thank-you for your responses to the referee and my comments and for the revised manuscript. I have some detailed comments (below) – “Technical corrections” – for you please to consider before uploading your manuscript for final publication. I do not need to see it again but please note that (i) all comments including those below will be available along with the published paper and (ii) the manuscript will be copy-edited and you should check that your intended meaning is preserved.
Thank-you for publishing in Ocean Science.
Yours sincerely
John Huthnance (Editor)

Detailed comments.
Line 47. Could omit “have been”.
Line 51. “homogeneous coastal area” –> “unstratified coastal sea”? [“homogeneous” needs definition; “area” might be on land.]
Line 52. “it could be classified into” –> “the response could be classified as”?
Line 167. “. . are the surface and bottom stresses . .”
Line 171. “a nondimensionalized could be” –> “scaling is”?
Lines 224-225. Please check. Better “where J2 is the second order Bessel function of the first kind.”?
Line 227 (Equation 17). I think you need to state where J0 and J2 are evaluated.
Lines 252-253. “. . . Nodes for Mode 2 appear . . .”

Line 296. “main reason” for what?
Line 306. “pointed out” –> “pointing out” or “showing”
Line 307. “The thick line . . .” I think this refers to 5(a) only; please say so.
Line 325. “propagating” –> “propagation”
Line 336. “these” –> “such” unless Csanady (1978) studied this area (I don’t think he did).

Line 409. “. . . wind-forced and . . .”
Line 433. Omit “the trapped characteristics as”?
Table 2. Please ensure that the final version does not split (Distance)** or Outlier(m) between rows.
Line 465. Better “, which shows that” –> “:” ?
Line 470. Better “That” –> “SLA”
Line 479. “. . Fig. 3a; they explain 25.1% . .”
Lines 482-483. “. . 3b; it only . .”
Figure 10 and caption. Lines 507-508 “Red curves represent the along-track SLA . .” does not match the figure with wind stress in red and SLA in blue.
Line 522. “. . the cross-shelf structure . .”
Lines 543-546. You already used “α” as a wavenumber (line 186 et seq.) so different notation is preferable. Please also define Ekman number here since you do not have viscosity or a single length scale.
Line 577. “neglective” –> “neglect of”. Omit “wind stress and” – you discuss wind stress!

Hide

AR by Junyi Li on behalf of the Authors (24 Sep 2023) Author's response Manuscript

Post-review adjustments

AA: Author's adjustment | EA: Editor approval

AA by Junyi Li on behalf of the Authors (07 Nov 2023) Author's adjustment Manuscript

EA: Adjustments approved (07 Nov 2023) by John M. Huthnance

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

09 Nov 2023

Statistical analysis of dynamic behavior of continental shelf wave motions in the northern South China Sea

Junyi Li, Tao He, Quanan Zheng, Ying Xu, and Lingling Xie

Ocean Sci., 19, 1545–1559, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-19-1545-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/os-19-1545-2023, 2023

Short summary

Junyi Li et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 411 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML	PDF	XML	Total	BibTeX	EndNote
308	78	25	411	12	10

HTML: 308
PDF: 78
XML: 25
Total: 411
BibTeX: 12
EndNote: 10

Views and downloads (calculated since 19 Jun 2023)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Jun 2023	70	13	6	89
Jul 2023	77	16	8	101
Aug 2023	71	15	6	92
Sep 2023	50	14	2	66
Oct 2023	36	17	3	56
Nov 2023	4	3	0	7

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 19 Jun 2023)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Jun 2023	70	13	6	89
Jul 2023	77	16	8	101
Aug 2023	71	15	6	92
Sep 2023	50	14	2	66
Oct 2023	36	17	3	56
Nov 2023	4	3	0	7

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 399 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 399 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country	#	Views	%

Latest update: 16 Nov 2023

Download

The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.

Preprint (2519 KB)
Metadata XML

Short summary

This study aims to analyze statistical behavior of the continental shelf wave motions, including continental shelf waves (CSW) and arrested topographic waves (ATW), in the northern South China Sea. The cross-shelf structure of along-track SLA indicates that mode 1 of CSWs is the predominant component trapped in the area shallower than about 200 m. The cross-shelf structures of CSWs and ATWs illustrate that the methods are suitable for observing dynamic behavior of the CSWs.


Total:	0
HTML:	0
PDF:	0
XML:	0