the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 19 Aug 2024
Water Vapor Transport and its Influence on Water Stable Isotope in Dongting Lake Basin
Abstract. Understanding water vapor sources and transport paths is essential for assessing the water cycle and predicting precipitation accurately. Utilizing water vapor diagnosis and calculations, this study determined the water vapor sources and transport paths leading to precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin in four seasons (represented by January, April, June, and October). In January, the water vapor generating precipitation originated from the Arabian Peninsula, driven by the southern branch of the westerlies over the southern side of the Tibetan Plateau, along the northern side of the Indian Peninsula through southwest China to reach the Dongting Lake Basin. In April, two transport paths emerged: one aligned closely with the January transport path but the location shifted slightly northward by one degree of latitude, and another was driven by the weak subtropical high over the southwestern Pacific, bringing moist air from the western Pacific via the South China Sea and Indochinese Peninsula. In June, the Dongting precipitation sourced from the northern branch of the South Indian Ocean subtropical high, crossed the equator and transported through various water bodies to southwestern China, finally reaching the basin. October saw a water vapor transport path from the western Pacific, crossing the South China Sea, and entering the Dongting Lake Basin influenced by the East Asian monsoon system. In different seasons, the variations in water stable isotopes along water vapor transport paths adhered to Rayleigh fractionation and water balance principles. These findings highlight the impact of atmospheric circulation on precipitation and isotopes, providing a framework for understanding water vapor isotope mechanisms and reconstructing past atmospheric conditions.
-
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
(15126 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(15126 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2215', Luke He, 12 Sep 2024
The manuscript entitled “Water Vapor Transport and its Influence on Water Stable Isotope in Dongting Lake Basin” by Xiao et al. presents a comprehensive study on the sources and transport pathways of water vapor and their influence on the isotopic composition of precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin. This region provides an excellent case study for understanding the intricate links between atmospheric circulation, water vapor dynamics, and isotopic signatures in precipitation. The research is particularly significant in the context of climate change, where such insights can aid in predicting shifts in precipitation patterns and their isotopic composition, which are vital for water resource management and paleoclimatic interpretations. The authors have employed a multi-faceted approach, utilizing both observational data and model simulations, to trace the origins and pathways of water vapor contributing to precipitation in the study area. The use of reanalysis data and isotopic simulations adds depth to the analysis, allowing for a robust examination of the seasonal variations in water vapor transport and their isotopic implications.
Overall, this manuscript could make a nice contribution and be of interest to many different groups ranging from hydrologists to meteorologists, and could be acceptable
for publication in the ACP. However, to further strengthen the manuscript and enhance its impact, several areas require the authors’ attention.My major comments are:
Line 33-42: the Significance Statement, I suggest the following logical structure for the presentation: Starting from the sources of precipitation water vapor (which characterize the influence of atmospheric circulation), that is, the origins of water vapor (initial conditions), to the changes in water stable isotopes along the water vapor transport pathways (stable isotope fractionation and water vapor exchange), and finally to the changes in precipitation isotopes at the point of deposition (outcomes). This approach will reflect a comprehensive understanding of the cycle and fractionation of water stable isotopes within the context of atmospheric circulation.
Line 385-406 and the relevant descriptions: How are the water vapor pathways determined? How are the source regions of water vapor identified? And how are the scatter points along the water vapor transport pathways established?Line 451~467: In April, there are two distinct pathways for water vapor transport. One is predominantly the transport of continental water vapor, and the other is maritime water vapor. A detailed comparison of the characteristic elements of these two pathways should be conducted. The water vapors from these two paths converge in the Dongting Lake Basin; which of these has a relatively more significant impaction the isotopic composition of precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin region?
My minor comments are:
Line 21: “Dongting precipitation sourced from ……”, should it perhaps read “vapor sourced from ……”?
Line 107: “air dehydration”, is this the correct term as used in the manuscript?Line 115: “are”, should this be in the present tense?
Line 224: “altitude” might be better replaced with “level” for clarity.
Line 226: “data release”, is this the appropriate term to use?
Line 229: It should be noted that the use of “potential height” is preferred, as well as the terms “latitudinal wind” and “meridional wind”.
Line 259: The order of “δ 2 H v , δ 18 O v , δ 2 H p , and δ 18 O p ” should be adjusted to match the sequence in the text.
Line 804: Or wherever it may appear, “Dongting precipitation” should be “precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-CC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
We appreciate the kindly and constructive comments from the reviewer and have revised the manuscript accordingly, the details can be found in the revision note in the supplement pdf file.
-
CC2: 'Reply on AC1', Luke He, 06 Oct 2024
The authors have clarified the questions I raised in my previous review and major problems have been addressed by this revision. I would recommend the manuscript for publication.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-CC2 -
AC4: 'Reply on CC2', Xinping Zhang, 07 Oct 2024
We appreciate the positive comments from the reviewer. If the editor gives us the opportunity to submit the revised manuscript and proceed to the next step of the review process, the details of the revision will be shown in the new manuscript version.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-AC4
-
AC4: 'Reply on CC2', Xinping Zhang, 07 Oct 2024
-
CC2: 'Reply on AC1', Luke He, 06 Oct 2024
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2215', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 Sep 2024
The manuscript presents a thorough investigation into the seasonal dynamics of water vapor transport and its influence on precipitation isotopes within the Dongting Lake Basin. The study’s findings contribute valuable insights into the complex interactions between atmospheric circulation and the hydrological cycle, particularly in the context of a monsoon-influenced region. The research is well-articulated, and the methodology is robust, providing a solid foundation for the conclusions drawn. The implications of this study for understanding regional climate patterns and their potential impact on water resource management are significant. The manuscript is well-written and engaging, but there are areas where further refinement could enhance its clarity and academic rigor. Here are some specific comments:
Figs. 3, 5, 7, and 9 feature a red box representing the Dongting Lake Basin that is disproportionately small compared to the scale of Region V in Fig. 11. The scale inconsistency across these figures necessitates a redrawing to ensure clarity and consistency. The visual presentation of data through figures and tables is crucial. Ensuring that all figures are clear, well-labeled, and effectively supporting the text is essential.
Regarding the figures depicting water vapor transport pathways, what is the representativeness of the factors along these paths? In other words, what are the characteristics of these factors’ variations, the features at different grid points, and the attributes during the water vapor transport process?
For the Significance Statement, I believe the narrative logic should be adjusted to align with the main research content and results of the paper.
Figures 3, 5, 7, and 9 did not have labels, the authors need to add “abcdef” to them. Although each figure was annotated within the sb-plots to indicate the corresponding conference logo, only by making this change can we prevent confusion among readers.
Lines 652-666: This section includes numerous comparative statistical values. What is the purpose of these comparisons, and what useful conclusions can be drawn from them?
Lines 175-176: The main cause of the East Asian monsoon should be attributed to the changes in the average atmospheric circulation patterns due to the thermal differences between land and sea.
Lines 178 and 181: The reference should be to the lower layer, that is, the lower troposphere, rather than “near the surface” or “near-surface”, correct?
Line 188: The term “precipitation isotope dynamics” would be better off without “dynamics”.
Line 189: It is suggested to change “analysis” to “measurement”.
Line 263: This section pertains to the “calculation of the vertical integral of water vapor flux Q”, not “Model Analysis”.
Line 322: There is no content in this manuscript comparing the “spatial distribution” of simulated and observed data. Is it necessary to include such a comparison? Or, the phrase “spatial distribution” could be directly removed.
There are minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that should be corrected to improve the manuscript's readability:
Line 161: The term used in the text to express “moist and cold” is more accurately described as “wet and cold”. Are there any alternative terms that could be used?
Line 276: The gravitational acceleration “g” should be in italics.
Line 304: The term “RA5” should be “ERA5”.
Line 411: “The East Asian mid-to-high latitude regions”, please check the accuracy of this expression. I suspect the original intent might have been to say “The mid-to-high latitude regions of East Asia...”. Please ensure that the same terms are used consistently throughout the manuscript to avoid confusion.
Lines 353, 599, and two other instances: The expressions “regarding the Dongting Lake Basin as the endpoint” and “regarding the Changsha site as the endpoint” should be consistent. Alternatively, use “According to the method introduced in section 3.2.1, ...”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
We appreciate the kindly and constructive comments from the reviewer and have revised the manuscript accordingly, the details can be found in the revision note in the supplement pdf file.
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC2', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Oct 2024
We appreciate the detailed revisions made by the authors, which have adequately addressed my questions, such as the determination of the water vapor transport path, the representativeness of the factors along the transport path, and the standardization of figures and main text. I believe the paper is methodologically sound, the results are clear, and it has a very general and board significance. I recommend that the paper be published in its current form.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-RC2 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Xinping Zhang, 06 Oct 2024
We are grateful for the recommendations of the reviewer. If the editor gives us the opportunity to submit the revised manuscript and proceed to the next step of the review process, the details of the revision will be shown in the new manuscript version.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-AC3
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Xinping Zhang, 06 Oct 2024
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC2', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Oct 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2215', Anonymous Referee #2, 08 Oct 2024
Review of Water Vapor Transport and Its Influence on Water Stable Isotopes in Dongting Lake Basin
This manuscript presents an analysis of seasonally varying moisture transport paths that influence the water isotopic composition of 1668 days’ worth of precipitation samples collected in the Dongting Lake Basin area of China. Transport paths are estimated using a “vector interpolation method” that is applied to vertically integrated moisture fluxes within IsoGSM, a General Circulation Model equipped with water isotopic tracers. The results largely follow expectation. Given that the moisture flux is a function of both wind field and moisture supply, water vapor transport paths do not always align strictly with dominant wind flows. Transport from higher latitudes tends to advect more isotopically depleted water than transport from lower latitudes. And precipitation processes en route to Dongting Lake Basin also influence precipitation isotope ratios. The manuscript is fairly easy to read but lengthy.
I have three overarching comments:
First, the study focuses almost entirely on seasonal climatological output from IsoGSM, which feels a bit disappointing given the incredibly large number of daily precipitation samples collected in the Dongting Lake Basin. None of the major findings require the precipitation isotope data, and the paper does not clearly link the IsoGSM interpretation back to the collected samples.
Second, the study is largely descriptive in nature. Seasonal maps of moisture, wind, and isotopic output are shown, but the reader is required to eyeball small spatial variations in otherwise large latitudinal gradients. One way to address this might be to plot composite differences (e.g. mapping one season as an anomaly from the annual mean, or plotting the difference between one season and another). Differences between the representative source regions could also be tested statistically, and transport paths could be shown on a single plot—again, to facilitate the reader’s ability to compare. The text states that isotopic variations along transport paths are consistent with Rayleigh distillation; however, it does not appear that this was ever tested, which would be quite easy to do in a quantitative manner.
Third, it is not clear to me what new information about water cycle processes (including transport) this study provides, other than to provide a thorough description of seasonal mean wind flows, moisture transport paths, and vapor and precipitation isotope ratios around a single location. It motivates me to ask: was the Dongting Lake Basin chosen for a particular reason as a scientifically important location? Or was this a study of opportunity based on the large number of event-based precipitation samples?
I feel that this study would benefit from some additional context for why this work was conducted, how the IsoGSM output guides us in understanding the precipitation data, and the inclusion of quantitative analyses.
I also have two additional comments specific to methodology:
First, the study needs to provide more information about the “vector interpolation method.” The introduction criticizes other moisture transport evaluation approaches, such as those based on Langrangian back trajectory techniques, because these cannot definitively determine what moisture becomes rain. However, it is not clear to me how interpreting vertically integrated moisture flux fields in IsoGSM would allow one to do this either. In fact, there is a possibility that the vertically integrated transport could be quite distinct from the transport vectors of moist layers that generate precipitation (e.g. if free tropospheric moisture convergence is more critical than low-level moisture convergence for producing rain).
Second, it appears that the paper weights all days equally in its analysis, regardless of whether rain occurred or not. Thus it is hard to draw conclusions about whether the descriptive analysis accurately describes the conditions in which precipitation samples were collected.
Other line-by-line comments:
Line 53 - This mention of isotope paleoclimate applications seems out of context. Could more information be provided or this sentence eliminated?
Line 89 - Here and in all other instances, I believe “southwesterly” is meant, rather than southwestward.
Line 94 - I do not understand what this concluding sentence is trying to say.
Line 116 - Rain forms from water vapor that condenses, so I’m not sure how water vapor source regions are not relevant for or the same as precipitation source regions, unless the source regions are being defined climatologically (irrespective of whether there is rain). Clarification is needed.
Line 129 - I’m not sure what is meant by “by simple deduction.” What follows is not obvious to me.
Line 139 - This seems to be the problem statement for the paper: what the analysis will address. This should appear sooner in the introduction, and the analyses should test these ideas (e.g. test consistency with Rayleigh distillation).
Line 155 - Sub “influence” for “influencing.”
Line 223 - I’m not sure what is meant by the “fractionation process…cannot be directly observed.” We cannot observe individual molecules evaporating and condensing, but we do observe the partitioning of isotopes between distinct water phases.
Line 243 - What are “the driving factors” referring to?
Line 285 - Here and elsewhere, variables should be defined. Deuterium excess is never explicitly defined in the paper, and the notation is irregular. Typically, we would write d for deuterium excess.
Figure 2 Caption is missing an “E” before “RA5.”
Line 359 - “Lied” is not the correct word.
Line 360 - it would help to point the vortex out if it is significant for the interpretation.
Line 381 - It is a bit misleading to state that deuterium excess is generally affected by condensation. It is often conserved when condensation occurs under thermodynamic equilibrium (at saturation). It is not when condensation occurs under supersaturation. There is also a dependence on temperature conditions, but this is more detail than required for this sentence.
Line 393 - It is very hard to see the January wind vectors to verify this statement.
Line 401 - here and elsewhere, “relatively positive” is misleading, since these values are always negative. “Less negative” or “higher” could work instead.
Figure 5 - It should be made more clear here and in the text that there are two dominant transport paths for this particular month. At first, I thought the January path was being copied over from the preceding plots. This leads me also to ask: how are two dominant paths selected? How does the method permit the identification of more than one average path?
Line 440 - I’m not sure one can make such a broad conclusion based solely on the fact that there are similar deuterium excess values between the lake basin and the ocean. Also, does the large bin size on the color scale of the maps hide small-scale spatial variability?
Line 487 - What is the “variation rule?” I am unfamiliar with this concept. A brief description would help.
Line 557 - I’m not sure I agree without knowing more. Similar advective paths is one reason deuterium excess may be similar between sites. They could also be influenced by similar degrees of sub-cloud evaporation or other processes that produce similar signals.
Line 638 - Should the representative regions be interpreted as the vapor source regions? This is not clear to me.
Line 654 - I don’t think “seasonal differences” is the right term. I believe the text is describing the difference between the max and min values for each season, not differences between seasons, which is what the former implies. Perhaps “seasonal range?” It’s also not clear to me why this particular metric is chosen.
Table 1 - I think some of the Discussion length could be cut down by removing parts of the text that simply repeat what is already in Table 1.
Line 683 - Sub “Furthermore” for “Furtherly”
Line 744 - I’m not sure what a “modificatory” air mass is or why it should become more negative. Condensation and precipitation cause air masses to lose heavy isotopes, as does mixing.
Line 749 - That air masses are distinct in various ways can be taken for granted. Hopefully we can conclude more than this from this original work? A more specific conclusion sentence would be welcome.
Line 783 - Point B in the schematic is where mixing between cold and warm advected air masses should occur, and yet mixing is not discussed in the paper as a possible process shaping the water vapor and precipitation isotope ratios. Some discussion of the contribution of mixing might be a worthwhile addition depending on what a revised, more quantitative analysis yields.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-RC3 - AC5: 'Reply on RC3', Xinping Zhang, 29 Oct 2024
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2215', Luke He, 12 Sep 2024
The manuscript entitled “Water Vapor Transport and its Influence on Water Stable Isotope in Dongting Lake Basin” by Xiao et al. presents a comprehensive study on the sources and transport pathways of water vapor and their influence on the isotopic composition of precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin. This region provides an excellent case study for understanding the intricate links between atmospheric circulation, water vapor dynamics, and isotopic signatures in precipitation. The research is particularly significant in the context of climate change, where such insights can aid in predicting shifts in precipitation patterns and their isotopic composition, which are vital for water resource management and paleoclimatic interpretations. The authors have employed a multi-faceted approach, utilizing both observational data and model simulations, to trace the origins and pathways of water vapor contributing to precipitation in the study area. The use of reanalysis data and isotopic simulations adds depth to the analysis, allowing for a robust examination of the seasonal variations in water vapor transport and their isotopic implications.
Overall, this manuscript could make a nice contribution and be of interest to many different groups ranging from hydrologists to meteorologists, and could be acceptable
for publication in the ACP. However, to further strengthen the manuscript and enhance its impact, several areas require the authors’ attention.My major comments are:
Line 33-42: the Significance Statement, I suggest the following logical structure for the presentation: Starting from the sources of precipitation water vapor (which characterize the influence of atmospheric circulation), that is, the origins of water vapor (initial conditions), to the changes in water stable isotopes along the water vapor transport pathways (stable isotope fractionation and water vapor exchange), and finally to the changes in precipitation isotopes at the point of deposition (outcomes). This approach will reflect a comprehensive understanding of the cycle and fractionation of water stable isotopes within the context of atmospheric circulation.
Line 385-406 and the relevant descriptions: How are the water vapor pathways determined? How are the source regions of water vapor identified? And how are the scatter points along the water vapor transport pathways established?Line 451~467: In April, there are two distinct pathways for water vapor transport. One is predominantly the transport of continental water vapor, and the other is maritime water vapor. A detailed comparison of the characteristic elements of these two pathways should be conducted. The water vapors from these two paths converge in the Dongting Lake Basin; which of these has a relatively more significant impaction the isotopic composition of precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin region?
My minor comments are:
Line 21: “Dongting precipitation sourced from ……”, should it perhaps read “vapor sourced from ……”?
Line 107: “air dehydration”, is this the correct term as used in the manuscript?Line 115: “are”, should this be in the present tense?
Line 224: “altitude” might be better replaced with “level” for clarity.
Line 226: “data release”, is this the appropriate term to use?
Line 229: It should be noted that the use of “potential height” is preferred, as well as the terms “latitudinal wind” and “meridional wind”.
Line 259: The order of “δ 2 H v , δ 18 O v , δ 2 H p , and δ 18 O p ” should be adjusted to match the sequence in the text.
Line 804: Or wherever it may appear, “Dongting precipitation” should be “precipitation in the Dongting Lake Basin”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-CC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
We appreciate the kindly and constructive comments from the reviewer and have revised the manuscript accordingly, the details can be found in the revision note in the supplement pdf file.
-
CC2: 'Reply on AC1', Luke He, 06 Oct 2024
The authors have clarified the questions I raised in my previous review and major problems have been addressed by this revision. I would recommend the manuscript for publication.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-CC2 -
AC4: 'Reply on CC2', Xinping Zhang, 07 Oct 2024
We appreciate the positive comments from the reviewer. If the editor gives us the opportunity to submit the revised manuscript and proceed to the next step of the review process, the details of the revision will be shown in the new manuscript version.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-AC4
-
AC4: 'Reply on CC2', Xinping Zhang, 07 Oct 2024
-
CC2: 'Reply on AC1', Luke He, 06 Oct 2024
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2215', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 Sep 2024
The manuscript presents a thorough investigation into the seasonal dynamics of water vapor transport and its influence on precipitation isotopes within the Dongting Lake Basin. The study’s findings contribute valuable insights into the complex interactions between atmospheric circulation and the hydrological cycle, particularly in the context of a monsoon-influenced region. The research is well-articulated, and the methodology is robust, providing a solid foundation for the conclusions drawn. The implications of this study for understanding regional climate patterns and their potential impact on water resource management are significant. The manuscript is well-written and engaging, but there are areas where further refinement could enhance its clarity and academic rigor. Here are some specific comments:
Figs. 3, 5, 7, and 9 feature a red box representing the Dongting Lake Basin that is disproportionately small compared to the scale of Region V in Fig. 11. The scale inconsistency across these figures necessitates a redrawing to ensure clarity and consistency. The visual presentation of data through figures and tables is crucial. Ensuring that all figures are clear, well-labeled, and effectively supporting the text is essential.
Regarding the figures depicting water vapor transport pathways, what is the representativeness of the factors along these paths? In other words, what are the characteristics of these factors’ variations, the features at different grid points, and the attributes during the water vapor transport process?
For the Significance Statement, I believe the narrative logic should be adjusted to align with the main research content and results of the paper.
Figures 3, 5, 7, and 9 did not have labels, the authors need to add “abcdef” to them. Although each figure was annotated within the sb-plots to indicate the corresponding conference logo, only by making this change can we prevent confusion among readers.
Lines 652-666: This section includes numerous comparative statistical values. What is the purpose of these comparisons, and what useful conclusions can be drawn from them?
Lines 175-176: The main cause of the East Asian monsoon should be attributed to the changes in the average atmospheric circulation patterns due to the thermal differences between land and sea.
Lines 178 and 181: The reference should be to the lower layer, that is, the lower troposphere, rather than “near the surface” or “near-surface”, correct?
Line 188: The term “precipitation isotope dynamics” would be better off without “dynamics”.
Line 189: It is suggested to change “analysis” to “measurement”.
Line 263: This section pertains to the “calculation of the vertical integral of water vapor flux Q”, not “Model Analysis”.
Line 322: There is no content in this manuscript comparing the “spatial distribution” of simulated and observed data. Is it necessary to include such a comparison? Or, the phrase “spatial distribution” could be directly removed.
There are minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that should be corrected to improve the manuscript's readability:
Line 161: The term used in the text to express “moist and cold” is more accurately described as “wet and cold”. Are there any alternative terms that could be used?
Line 276: The gravitational acceleration “g” should be in italics.
Line 304: The term “RA5” should be “ERA5”.
Line 411: “The East Asian mid-to-high latitude regions”, please check the accuracy of this expression. I suspect the original intent might have been to say “The mid-to-high latitude regions of East Asia...”. Please ensure that the same terms are used consistently throughout the manuscript to avoid confusion.
Lines 353, 599, and two other instances: The expressions “regarding the Dongting Lake Basin as the endpoint” and “regarding the Changsha site as the endpoint” should be consistent. Alternatively, use “According to the method introduced in section 3.2.1, ...”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
We appreciate the kindly and constructive comments from the reviewer and have revised the manuscript accordingly, the details can be found in the revision note in the supplement pdf file.
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC2', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Oct 2024
We appreciate the detailed revisions made by the authors, which have adequately addressed my questions, such as the determination of the water vapor transport path, the representativeness of the factors along the transport path, and the standardization of figures and main text. I believe the paper is methodologically sound, the results are clear, and it has a very general and board significance. I recommend that the paper be published in its current form.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-RC2 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Xinping Zhang, 06 Oct 2024
We are grateful for the recommendations of the reviewer. If the editor gives us the opportunity to submit the revised manuscript and proceed to the next step of the review process, the details of the revision will be shown in the new manuscript version.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-AC3
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Xinping Zhang, 06 Oct 2024
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC2', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Oct 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Xinping Zhang, 01 Oct 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2215', Anonymous Referee #2, 08 Oct 2024
Review of Water Vapor Transport and Its Influence on Water Stable Isotopes in Dongting Lake Basin
This manuscript presents an analysis of seasonally varying moisture transport paths that influence the water isotopic composition of 1668 days’ worth of precipitation samples collected in the Dongting Lake Basin area of China. Transport paths are estimated using a “vector interpolation method” that is applied to vertically integrated moisture fluxes within IsoGSM, a General Circulation Model equipped with water isotopic tracers. The results largely follow expectation. Given that the moisture flux is a function of both wind field and moisture supply, water vapor transport paths do not always align strictly with dominant wind flows. Transport from higher latitudes tends to advect more isotopically depleted water than transport from lower latitudes. And precipitation processes en route to Dongting Lake Basin also influence precipitation isotope ratios. The manuscript is fairly easy to read but lengthy.
I have three overarching comments:
First, the study focuses almost entirely on seasonal climatological output from IsoGSM, which feels a bit disappointing given the incredibly large number of daily precipitation samples collected in the Dongting Lake Basin. None of the major findings require the precipitation isotope data, and the paper does not clearly link the IsoGSM interpretation back to the collected samples.
Second, the study is largely descriptive in nature. Seasonal maps of moisture, wind, and isotopic output are shown, but the reader is required to eyeball small spatial variations in otherwise large latitudinal gradients. One way to address this might be to plot composite differences (e.g. mapping one season as an anomaly from the annual mean, or plotting the difference between one season and another). Differences between the representative source regions could also be tested statistically, and transport paths could be shown on a single plot—again, to facilitate the reader’s ability to compare. The text states that isotopic variations along transport paths are consistent with Rayleigh distillation; however, it does not appear that this was ever tested, which would be quite easy to do in a quantitative manner.
Third, it is not clear to me what new information about water cycle processes (including transport) this study provides, other than to provide a thorough description of seasonal mean wind flows, moisture transport paths, and vapor and precipitation isotope ratios around a single location. It motivates me to ask: was the Dongting Lake Basin chosen for a particular reason as a scientifically important location? Or was this a study of opportunity based on the large number of event-based precipitation samples?
I feel that this study would benefit from some additional context for why this work was conducted, how the IsoGSM output guides us in understanding the precipitation data, and the inclusion of quantitative analyses.
I also have two additional comments specific to methodology:
First, the study needs to provide more information about the “vector interpolation method.” The introduction criticizes other moisture transport evaluation approaches, such as those based on Langrangian back trajectory techniques, because these cannot definitively determine what moisture becomes rain. However, it is not clear to me how interpreting vertically integrated moisture flux fields in IsoGSM would allow one to do this either. In fact, there is a possibility that the vertically integrated transport could be quite distinct from the transport vectors of moist layers that generate precipitation (e.g. if free tropospheric moisture convergence is more critical than low-level moisture convergence for producing rain).
Second, it appears that the paper weights all days equally in its analysis, regardless of whether rain occurred or not. Thus it is hard to draw conclusions about whether the descriptive analysis accurately describes the conditions in which precipitation samples were collected.
Other line-by-line comments:
Line 53 - This mention of isotope paleoclimate applications seems out of context. Could more information be provided or this sentence eliminated?
Line 89 - Here and in all other instances, I believe “southwesterly” is meant, rather than southwestward.
Line 94 - I do not understand what this concluding sentence is trying to say.
Line 116 - Rain forms from water vapor that condenses, so I’m not sure how water vapor source regions are not relevant for or the same as precipitation source regions, unless the source regions are being defined climatologically (irrespective of whether there is rain). Clarification is needed.
Line 129 - I’m not sure what is meant by “by simple deduction.” What follows is not obvious to me.
Line 139 - This seems to be the problem statement for the paper: what the analysis will address. This should appear sooner in the introduction, and the analyses should test these ideas (e.g. test consistency with Rayleigh distillation).
Line 155 - Sub “influence” for “influencing.”
Line 223 - I’m not sure what is meant by the “fractionation process…cannot be directly observed.” We cannot observe individual molecules evaporating and condensing, but we do observe the partitioning of isotopes between distinct water phases.
Line 243 - What are “the driving factors” referring to?
Line 285 - Here and elsewhere, variables should be defined. Deuterium excess is never explicitly defined in the paper, and the notation is irregular. Typically, we would write d for deuterium excess.
Figure 2 Caption is missing an “E” before “RA5.”
Line 359 - “Lied” is not the correct word.
Line 360 - it would help to point the vortex out if it is significant for the interpretation.
Line 381 - It is a bit misleading to state that deuterium excess is generally affected by condensation. It is often conserved when condensation occurs under thermodynamic equilibrium (at saturation). It is not when condensation occurs under supersaturation. There is also a dependence on temperature conditions, but this is more detail than required for this sentence.
Line 393 - It is very hard to see the January wind vectors to verify this statement.
Line 401 - here and elsewhere, “relatively positive” is misleading, since these values are always negative. “Less negative” or “higher” could work instead.
Figure 5 - It should be made more clear here and in the text that there are two dominant transport paths for this particular month. At first, I thought the January path was being copied over from the preceding plots. This leads me also to ask: how are two dominant paths selected? How does the method permit the identification of more than one average path?
Line 440 - I’m not sure one can make such a broad conclusion based solely on the fact that there are similar deuterium excess values between the lake basin and the ocean. Also, does the large bin size on the color scale of the maps hide small-scale spatial variability?
Line 487 - What is the “variation rule?” I am unfamiliar with this concept. A brief description would help.
Line 557 - I’m not sure I agree without knowing more. Similar advective paths is one reason deuterium excess may be similar between sites. They could also be influenced by similar degrees of sub-cloud evaporation or other processes that produce similar signals.
Line 638 - Should the representative regions be interpreted as the vapor source regions? This is not clear to me.
Line 654 - I don’t think “seasonal differences” is the right term. I believe the text is describing the difference between the max and min values for each season, not differences between seasons, which is what the former implies. Perhaps “seasonal range?” It’s also not clear to me why this particular metric is chosen.
Table 1 - I think some of the Discussion length could be cut down by removing parts of the text that simply repeat what is already in Table 1.
Line 683 - Sub “Furthermore” for “Furtherly”
Line 744 - I’m not sure what a “modificatory” air mass is or why it should become more negative. Condensation and precipitation cause air masses to lose heavy isotopes, as does mixing.
Line 749 - That air masses are distinct in various ways can be taken for granted. Hopefully we can conclude more than this from this original work? A more specific conclusion sentence would be welcome.
Line 783 - Point B in the schematic is where mixing between cold and warm advected air masses should occur, and yet mixing is not discussed in the paper as a possible process shaping the water vapor and precipitation isotope ratios. Some discussion of the contribution of mixing might be a worthwhile addition depending on what a revised, more quantitative analysis yields.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2215-RC3 - AC5: 'Reply on RC3', Xinping Zhang, 29 Oct 2024
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 454 | 174 | 1,125 | 1,753 | 23 | 31 |
- HTML: 454
- PDF: 174
- XML: 1,125
- Total: 1,753
- BibTeX: 23
- EndNote: 31
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Xiong Xiao
Xinping Zhang
Zhuoyong Xiao
Zhongli Liu
Dizhou Wang
Cicheng Zhang
Zhiguo Rao
Xinguang He
Huade Guan
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(15126 KB) - Metadata XML