Explicit simulation of reactive microbial transport with a dual-permeability, two-site kinetic deposition formulation using the integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model HydroGeoSphere (rev. 2699)

Currle, Friederike; Therrien, René; Schilling, Oliver S.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787

Preprints

https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787

Preprints

12 Dec 2024

| 12 Dec 2024

Status: this preprint has been withdrawn by the authors.

Explicit simulation of reactive microbial transport with a dual-permeability, two-site kinetic deposition formulation using the integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model HydroGeoSphere (rev. 2699)

Friederike Currle, René Therrien, and Oliver S. Schilling

Abstract. Assessing the transport behavior of microbes in surface water-groundwater systems is important to prevent contamination of drinking water resources by pathogens. While wellhead protection area (WHPA) delineation is still predominantly based on dye injection tests and advective transport modeling, size exclusion of colloid-sized microbes from the smaller and usually less conductive pore space causes a faster breakthrough and thus faster apparent transport of microbes compared to that of solutes. To provide a tool for better assessment of the differences between solute and microbial transport in surface water-groundwater systems, we here present the implementation of a dual-permeability, two-site kinetic deposition formulation for microbial transport in the integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model HydroGeoSphere (HGS). The implementation considers attachment, detachment and inactivation of microbes in both permeability regions and allows for multispecies transport. The dual-permeability, two-site kinetic deposition implementation in HGS was verified against an analytical solution for dual-permeability colloid transport and the suitability of the model for microbial transport at the wellfield scale is illustrated in a multi-tracer flow and transport study of an idealized alluvial riverbank filtration site. In this illustrative example, the transport of reactive microbes, conservative ⁴He, and reactive ²²²Rn was simulated in parallel, allowing mixing ratios, tracer breakthrough curves and travel times to be assessed via multiple approaches. The developed simulation tool is the first integrated surface-subsurface hydrological simulator for reactive solute and microbial transport, and marks an important advancement to unlock and quantify governing microbial transport processes in riverbank filtration settings. It enables meaningful WHPA delineation and risk assessments even under extreme hydrological situations such as flood events.

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Received: 03 Dec 2024 – Discussion started: 12 Dec 2024

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.

Download & links

Preprint (PDF, 1333 KB)

Withdrawal notice
This preprint has been withdrawn.
Preprint (1333 KB)

Download & links

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Friederike Currle, René Therrien, and Oliver S. Schilling

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

CEC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2024-3787 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 27 Dec 2024

Dear authors,

Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".

https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
In your "Code and Data Availability" statement you say that the code and data that you use for your work is available upon request and that to get access or run HydroGeoSphere, it is necessary a license. I am sorry to have to be so outspoken, but this is something completely unacceptable, forbidden by our policy, and your manuscript should have never been accepted for Discussions given such flagrant violation of the policy. All the code and data necessary to produce the work described in a manuscript must be published openly and freely in one of the repositories listed in our policy before submission of a manuscript.
Therefore, we are granting you a short time to solve this situation, that should be solved over the next few days. You have to reply to this comment in a prompt manner with the information for the repositories containing all the models, code and data that you use to produce and replicate your manuscript. The reply must include the link and permanent identifier (e.g. DOI). Also, any future version of your manuscript must include the modified section with the new information.
Note that if you do not fix these problems as requested, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal. Additionally, I advice the Topical Editor to stall the peer-review process until this situation with the code and data is solved.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CEC1
- CC1:
  'Reply on CEC1', Oliver S. Schilling, 29 Dec 2024
  
  Dear Executive Editor Juan A. Añel
  As you can see from the conversation with the editorial office, the original code availability statement has already been amended via an author reply to the editorial feedback. This author reply is available among the discussion files and includes a link to all the model input files needed to reproduce the numerical experiments described and presented in the paper. This link serves as an anonymous, temporary solution to provide the model input files for the review process. As stated in our original code availability statement, we intend to publish the model input files permanently on Hydroshare upon acceptance of the manuscript, but prefer to work with a temporary solution in order to maintain the possibility to update the files in case this could become necessary. The temporary link, which has already been available in the author reply file provided as part of the "minor initial revision", is
  
  https://filesender.switch.ch/filesender2/?s=download&token=a3750399-7bd5-495e-b412-36d3ac2131eb
  With respect to the software HydroGeoSphere in which the new reactive microbial transport routine (based on modified colloid filtration theory) has been implemented, this is a proprietary numerical modelling software that belongs to the company Aquanty, Inc.. As we are not the owners of the software, our hands are tied and we cannot provide the actual code implementation of the equations ourselves. We have been completely open about this in our original code availability statement and consequently stated that a license has to be obtained to be able to execute HydroGeoSphere. We understand that for reviewers, free test licenses can be obtained from Aquanty upon request, but as we are not the owners of the software, we ourselves cannot grant such licenses.
  All the equations that we considered and combined for the implementation of reactive microbial transport into a fully integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model, and which were then used by Aquanty for the numerical implementation into their proprietary software HydroGeoSphere, are provided in the manuscript. Information on the code implementation can be obtained from the HydroGeoSphere technical reference documents (starting with rev. 2699, as stated accordingly in the title of the manuscript), which are freely available for download from the Aquanty homepage:
  
  https://www.aquanty.com/hgs-download.
  The "Code and Data Policy" statement does not rule out the presentation and description of new modelling features in proprietary software. It asks authors to clearly state the restriction (which is why we mentioned that for running HydroGeoSphere a license must be obtained from Aquanty) and states that as long as reviewers are able to obtain access to the model, a manuscript may be acceptable. In good faith we followed these guidelines and trusted the editorial office to guide us through this process. As requested by the editorial office, we have already provided a temporary anonymous link to the model input files, which we unfortunately missed in the initial submission.
  We hope that this reply has been able to clarify the code and data availability and are happy to provide additional information in case this is still necessary.
  Thank you for your time and consideration.
  In the name of all co-authors
  
  Oliver S. Schilling
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CC1
  - CEC2: 'Reply on CC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 31 Dec 2024
    
    Dear authors,
    Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately, I think you do not understand our policy, and therefore you are missing in this discussion some important points. Secondly, I apologize for the misunderstandings that your communication with the Topical Editor of your manuscript (who has requested you to comply with the code policy, not the editorial office) can have caused.
    Our policy allows submitting manuscripts presenting developments for proprietary software, but this is not the point where you fail to comply with the policy of the journal. The problem is that you have not shared openly in a trusted repository the code you have developed and the data you have generated with it. The "fileshare" server is not a long-term trusted repository for scientific publication, and does not comply with the list of repositories that we request according to our policy. It does not even provide a permanent handle for it (e.g. DOI).
    You state that you will make available a final version of the code. This is a lack of understanding of the review process and the fundamentals of editorial process of our journal. It is mandatory that all the versions of the code (even if they contain failures or bugs that could be corrected) are published and without ability to be removed by the authors, the first one corresponding to the initial submission and the last one after all the Discussions stage. This is necessary to assure the full tracking of all the stages of the public Discussions stage, that has to remain public after the final decision on the manuscript.
    Also, it is your responsibility to provide the full details that allow to access the proprietary code, or to get a license to use it, and a statement saying that it is possible to "download from HydroShare" is not enough. You need to provide details on the company developing it (that could change in the future, making it complicated), a link that is working right now, contact details, etc. It would be even better if you can store the privative code you have used in a private repository (e.g. a Zenodo private repository), where it remains stored for the purposed of scientific replicability, meanwhile you keep control on who can access it.
    Therefore, again, you must store all the code you have developed and present in your manuscript in a trusted repository, one of the accepted ones according to our policy, and reply to this comment with the link and permanent identifier (e.g. DOI) for it. Moreover, if it applies, the repository must contain all the output data generated with this code and corresponding to the results presented in the manuscript. Other option is to provide a separate repository for the data. You must provide such repositories all along the review process and for all the different versions that are necessary.
    Also, I have not seen a license in the filesender web page of your code. If you do not include a license, the code continues to be your property and can not be used by others, despite any statement on being free to use or publishing it. Therefore, when uploading your code to the new repository, you need to include a license. You could want to choose a free software/open-source (FLOSS) license. Our policy recommends several of them. A common one used is the GPLv3. If you decide to use it, you only need to include the file 'https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt' as LICENSE.txt with your code. Also, you can choose other options: GPLv2, Apache License, MIT License, etc.
    I hope this comment is more clear now, and allow you to understand our policy, and that you are able of complying with it following the requirements here exposed. I have to insist that the causes do not mind, the fact that your manuscript has been accepted in Discussions should have not happened, and we need to solve this situation. As some fault is on the editorial process that lead to it, therefore we are giving you an opportunity to fix it and comply with the policy, as the best solution for all parts; however, if you continue to do not comply with the policy (something that you should have observed at the submission and is your resposibility), we will have no choice but to reject the manuscript.
    Please, remember that you need to modify the "Code and Data Availability" section of your manuscript with all the new information here requested (links and DOIs).
    Juan A. Añel
    Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CEC2
    
    CC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Oliver S. Schilling, 01 Jan 2025
    
    Dear executive editor,
    Thank you too for your reply and extended explanation.
    In terms of repository, we have chosen Hydroshare as the repository for the model input files. Hydroshare is a FAIR, long term repository equivalent to zenodo. https://www.hydroshare.org/
    We now understand that GMD asks for open long-term publication of the manuscript accompanying files on such a repository. This wasn't entirely clear to us and after our initial conversation with the GMD editorial office, our approach of storing the files for the review process on a temporary solutions was accepted. Hence we believed that we were fulfilling the criteria of GMD. It would be possible to publish the files on hydroshare permanently already during the review process, in case this would permit continuation of the peer-review process at GMD.
    However, as outlined in our previous reply, the actual code implementation of our new approach to simulate reactive microbial transport in a fully integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model is proprietary and not owned by us. We are able to publish all the equations that we use for the approach, all the input files needed to run the models presented in the manuscript, as well as all model output files. What we can't publish is the actual code nor a temporary license to the software, as the software is not in our possession. From your reply I believe that even if we would succeed in negotiating the ability to publish alongside the model input files a temporary software license exclusively for reviewers during the review process, we would still not comply with the GMD policy of wanting to see all code published openly.
    As such, we wonder if the most reasonable next step forward would be to transfer the manuscript to another EGUsphere journal with a different focus, namely Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS). There it is not required that the actual software code is published alongside the manuscript.
    May we ask if you, in your capacity as executive editor, can either accept the manuscript at GMD for the review process under the given limitations, or, if not, can transfer the manuscript to HESS?
    In the name of all co-authors, kind regards
    
    Oliver Schilling
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CC2
    
    CEC3: 'Reply on CC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 02 Jan 2025
    
    Dear authors,
    Thanks for your reply. I would like to make several clarifications, addressing some points you have raised. First, it is not that you could publish the assets during the review process if it is necessary, but that our journal can not accept that the review process for a manuscript (the Discussions stage) begins without having published them. This is exactly why the situation with your manuscript is irregular. The review process include the review of all the code and data anonymously by any member of the public or reviewer, and the only way to assure it is that you publish such information openly and without limits when you submit your manuscript. Therefore, it is actually necessary that you publish it. Regarding the code, we can accept that you have made a development for a proprietary model that can not be published because it is out of your control, but that you want to publish a paper on the part you have developed. However, it is mandatory that you publish the new code you have developed, and make available the full model to the editors and reviewers. Also, you must provide evidence that not publishing the full model code is out of your control (contracts, documents, laws, regulations, etc.)
    Second, I am sorry, but we can not accept Hydroshare.org as a valid repository. The policy of Hydroshare.org available in https://help.hydroshare.org/ indicates that authors can edit or delete submitted data. It is necessary that you publish your assets in a repository that does not allow editing or removal of data after submission. I recommend you to check the list of repositories that we list.
    About a potential withdrawal of your manuscript from our journal, and its submission to a new one, this is a decision that pertains to you. A publication in Discussions is not considered a final manuscript, and therefore it should not preclude that other journals accept resubmitting to them.
    juan A. Añel
    Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CEC3
    
    CC3: 'Reply on CEC3', Oliver S. Schilling, 14 Jan 2025
    
    Dear executive editor
    We have now discussed the matter of transferring our manuscript with the editorial office of HESS and the executive editors have agreed to accept our manuscript for peer-review. We have thus contacted the editorial support of Copernicus to initiate the transfer of our manuscript from the GMD to the HESS review forum, as you can see in an email to the editorial office in which you were cc'd
    Thank you for your explanations and consideration
    Kind regards
    Oliver Schilling
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CC3
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3787', Friederike Currle, 16 Jan 2025

Based on the discussion with the executive editor of GMD and discussions with the editorial board of HESS, it was agreed that HESS is a more fitting journal for our study. The manuscript is thus transferred to HESS for peer-review.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-AC1

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

CEC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2024-3787 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 27 Dec 2024

Dear authors,

Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".

https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
In your "Code and Data Availability" statement you say that the code and data that you use for your work is available upon request and that to get access or run HydroGeoSphere, it is necessary a license. I am sorry to have to be so outspoken, but this is something completely unacceptable, forbidden by our policy, and your manuscript should have never been accepted for Discussions given such flagrant violation of the policy. All the code and data necessary to produce the work described in a manuscript must be published openly and freely in one of the repositories listed in our policy before submission of a manuscript.
Therefore, we are granting you a short time to solve this situation, that should be solved over the next few days. You have to reply to this comment in a prompt manner with the information for the repositories containing all the models, code and data that you use to produce and replicate your manuscript. The reply must include the link and permanent identifier (e.g. DOI). Also, any future version of your manuscript must include the modified section with the new information.
Note that if you do not fix these problems as requested, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal. Additionally, I advice the Topical Editor to stall the peer-review process until this situation with the code and data is solved.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CEC1
- CC1:
  'Reply on CEC1', Oliver S. Schilling, 29 Dec 2024
  
  Dear Executive Editor Juan A. Añel
  As you can see from the conversation with the editorial office, the original code availability statement has already been amended via an author reply to the editorial feedback. This author reply is available among the discussion files and includes a link to all the model input files needed to reproduce the numerical experiments described and presented in the paper. This link serves as an anonymous, temporary solution to provide the model input files for the review process. As stated in our original code availability statement, we intend to publish the model input files permanently on Hydroshare upon acceptance of the manuscript, but prefer to work with a temporary solution in order to maintain the possibility to update the files in case this could become necessary. The temporary link, which has already been available in the author reply file provided as part of the "minor initial revision", is
  
  https://filesender.switch.ch/filesender2/?s=download&token=a3750399-7bd5-495e-b412-36d3ac2131eb
  With respect to the software HydroGeoSphere in which the new reactive microbial transport routine (based on modified colloid filtration theory) has been implemented, this is a proprietary numerical modelling software that belongs to the company Aquanty, Inc.. As we are not the owners of the software, our hands are tied and we cannot provide the actual code implementation of the equations ourselves. We have been completely open about this in our original code availability statement and consequently stated that a license has to be obtained to be able to execute HydroGeoSphere. We understand that for reviewers, free test licenses can be obtained from Aquanty upon request, but as we are not the owners of the software, we ourselves cannot grant such licenses.
  All the equations that we considered and combined for the implementation of reactive microbial transport into a fully integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model, and which were then used by Aquanty for the numerical implementation into their proprietary software HydroGeoSphere, are provided in the manuscript. Information on the code implementation can be obtained from the HydroGeoSphere technical reference documents (starting with rev. 2699, as stated accordingly in the title of the manuscript), which are freely available for download from the Aquanty homepage:
  
  https://www.aquanty.com/hgs-download.
  The "Code and Data Policy" statement does not rule out the presentation and description of new modelling features in proprietary software. It asks authors to clearly state the restriction (which is why we mentioned that for running HydroGeoSphere a license must be obtained from Aquanty) and states that as long as reviewers are able to obtain access to the model, a manuscript may be acceptable. In good faith we followed these guidelines and trusted the editorial office to guide us through this process. As requested by the editorial office, we have already provided a temporary anonymous link to the model input files, which we unfortunately missed in the initial submission.
  We hope that this reply has been able to clarify the code and data availability and are happy to provide additional information in case this is still necessary.
  Thank you for your time and consideration.
  In the name of all co-authors
  
  Oliver S. Schilling
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CC1
  - CEC2: 'Reply on CC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 31 Dec 2024
    
    Dear authors,
    Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately, I think you do not understand our policy, and therefore you are missing in this discussion some important points. Secondly, I apologize for the misunderstandings that your communication with the Topical Editor of your manuscript (who has requested you to comply with the code policy, not the editorial office) can have caused.
    Our policy allows submitting manuscripts presenting developments for proprietary software, but this is not the point where you fail to comply with the policy of the journal. The problem is that you have not shared openly in a trusted repository the code you have developed and the data you have generated with it. The "fileshare" server is not a long-term trusted repository for scientific publication, and does not comply with the list of repositories that we request according to our policy. It does not even provide a permanent handle for it (e.g. DOI).
    You state that you will make available a final version of the code. This is a lack of understanding of the review process and the fundamentals of editorial process of our journal. It is mandatory that all the versions of the code (even if they contain failures or bugs that could be corrected) are published and without ability to be removed by the authors, the first one corresponding to the initial submission and the last one after all the Discussions stage. This is necessary to assure the full tracking of all the stages of the public Discussions stage, that has to remain public after the final decision on the manuscript.
    Also, it is your responsibility to provide the full details that allow to access the proprietary code, or to get a license to use it, and a statement saying that it is possible to "download from HydroShare" is not enough. You need to provide details on the company developing it (that could change in the future, making it complicated), a link that is working right now, contact details, etc. It would be even better if you can store the privative code you have used in a private repository (e.g. a Zenodo private repository), where it remains stored for the purposed of scientific replicability, meanwhile you keep control on who can access it.
    Therefore, again, you must store all the code you have developed and present in your manuscript in a trusted repository, one of the accepted ones according to our policy, and reply to this comment with the link and permanent identifier (e.g. DOI) for it. Moreover, if it applies, the repository must contain all the output data generated with this code and corresponding to the results presented in the manuscript. Other option is to provide a separate repository for the data. You must provide such repositories all along the review process and for all the different versions that are necessary.
    Also, I have not seen a license in the filesender web page of your code. If you do not include a license, the code continues to be your property and can not be used by others, despite any statement on being free to use or publishing it. Therefore, when uploading your code to the new repository, you need to include a license. You could want to choose a free software/open-source (FLOSS) license. Our policy recommends several of them. A common one used is the GPLv3. If you decide to use it, you only need to include the file 'https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt' as LICENSE.txt with your code. Also, you can choose other options: GPLv2, Apache License, MIT License, etc.
    I hope this comment is more clear now, and allow you to understand our policy, and that you are able of complying with it following the requirements here exposed. I have to insist that the causes do not mind, the fact that your manuscript has been accepted in Discussions should have not happened, and we need to solve this situation. As some fault is on the editorial process that lead to it, therefore we are giving you an opportunity to fix it and comply with the policy, as the best solution for all parts; however, if you continue to do not comply with the policy (something that you should have observed at the submission and is your resposibility), we will have no choice but to reject the manuscript.
    Please, remember that you need to modify the "Code and Data Availability" section of your manuscript with all the new information here requested (links and DOIs).
    Juan A. Añel
    Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CEC2
    
    CC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Oliver S. Schilling, 01 Jan 2025
    
    Dear executive editor,
    Thank you too for your reply and extended explanation.
    In terms of repository, we have chosen Hydroshare as the repository for the model input files. Hydroshare is a FAIR, long term repository equivalent to zenodo. https://www.hydroshare.org/
    We now understand that GMD asks for open long-term publication of the manuscript accompanying files on such a repository. This wasn't entirely clear to us and after our initial conversation with the GMD editorial office, our approach of storing the files for the review process on a temporary solutions was accepted. Hence we believed that we were fulfilling the criteria of GMD. It would be possible to publish the files on hydroshare permanently already during the review process, in case this would permit continuation of the peer-review process at GMD.
    However, as outlined in our previous reply, the actual code implementation of our new approach to simulate reactive microbial transport in a fully integrated surface-subsurface hydrological model is proprietary and not owned by us. We are able to publish all the equations that we use for the approach, all the input files needed to run the models presented in the manuscript, as well as all model output files. What we can't publish is the actual code nor a temporary license to the software, as the software is not in our possession. From your reply I believe that even if we would succeed in negotiating the ability to publish alongside the model input files a temporary software license exclusively for reviewers during the review process, we would still not comply with the GMD policy of wanting to see all code published openly.
    As such, we wonder if the most reasonable next step forward would be to transfer the manuscript to another EGUsphere journal with a different focus, namely Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS). There it is not required that the actual software code is published alongside the manuscript.
    May we ask if you, in your capacity as executive editor, can either accept the manuscript at GMD for the review process under the given limitations, or, if not, can transfer the manuscript to HESS?
    In the name of all co-authors, kind regards
    
    Oliver Schilling
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CC2
    
    CEC3: 'Reply on CC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 02 Jan 2025
    
    Dear authors,
    Thanks for your reply. I would like to make several clarifications, addressing some points you have raised. First, it is not that you could publish the assets during the review process if it is necessary, but that our journal can not accept that the review process for a manuscript (the Discussions stage) begins without having published them. This is exactly why the situation with your manuscript is irregular. The review process include the review of all the code and data anonymously by any member of the public or reviewer, and the only way to assure it is that you publish such information openly and without limits when you submit your manuscript. Therefore, it is actually necessary that you publish it. Regarding the code, we can accept that you have made a development for a proprietary model that can not be published because it is out of your control, but that you want to publish a paper on the part you have developed. However, it is mandatory that you publish the new code you have developed, and make available the full model to the editors and reviewers. Also, you must provide evidence that not publishing the full model code is out of your control (contracts, documents, laws, regulations, etc.)
    Second, I am sorry, but we can not accept Hydroshare.org as a valid repository. The policy of Hydroshare.org available in https://help.hydroshare.org/ indicates that authors can edit or delete submitted data. It is necessary that you publish your assets in a repository that does not allow editing or removal of data after submission. I recommend you to check the list of repositories that we list.
    About a potential withdrawal of your manuscript from our journal, and its submission to a new one, this is a decision that pertains to you. A publication in Discussions is not considered a final manuscript, and therefore it should not preclude that other journals accept resubmitting to them.
    juan A. Añel
    Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CEC3
    
    CC3: 'Reply on CEC3', Oliver S. Schilling, 14 Jan 2025
    
    Dear executive editor
    We have now discussed the matter of transferring our manuscript with the editorial office of HESS and the executive editors have agreed to accept our manuscript for peer-review. We have thus contacted the editorial support of Copernicus to initiate the transfer of our manuscript from the GMD to the HESS review forum, as you can see in an email to the editorial office in which you were cc'd
    Thank you for your explanations and consideration
    Kind regards
    Oliver Schilling
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-CC3
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3787', Friederike Currle, 16 Jan 2025

Based on the discussion with the executive editor of GMD and discussions with the editorial board of HESS, it was agreed that HESS is a more fitting journal for our study. The manuscript is thus transferred to HESS for peer-review.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3787-AC1

Friederike Currle, René Therrien, and Oliver S. Schilling

Viewed

Total article views: 285 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML	PDF	XML	Total	BibTeX	EndNote
213	62	10	285	4	4

HTML: 213
PDF: 62
XML: 10
Total: 285
BibTeX: 4
EndNote: 4

Views and downloads (calculated since 12 Dec 2024)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Dec 2024	125	41	6	172
Jan 2025	88	21	4	113

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 12 Dec 2024)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Dec 2024	125	41	6	172
Jan 2025	88	21	4	113

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 269 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 269 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country	#	Views	%

Latest update: 21 Jan 2025

Short summary

We present a new approach to simulate the transport of microbes in river-aquifer systems in the integrated hydrological model HydroGeoSphere. Compared to existing models, the advantage of the new implementation lies in the consideration of all relevant parts of the water budget and the flexibility to simulate in parallel the reactive transport of several microbial species and solutes. The new developed tool enables to improve our understanding of pathogen transport in river-groundwater systems.


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