the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Evaluating stable isotopic compositions in near-surface atmospheric water vapor over the Tibetan Plateau using the isotope-enabled atmospheric general circulation model ECHAM6-wiso
Abstract. Water stable isotopologues, particularly H218O and HD16O, are valuable tracers of physical and dynamical processes within the hydrological cycle. These isotopologues have been widely incorporated into isotope-enabled atmospheric general circulation models to constrain moisture sources and transport pathways. However, comprehensive evaluations of such models over the Tibetan Plateau (TP), a region whose complex orography substantially modulates South Asian monsoon dynamics, remain scarce. Here, we systematically evaluate simulations of water vapor isotopic composition (δ18Ov) from the ECHAM6-wiso model against daily in-situ observations from four high‐altitude stations (Kathmandu, Lulang, Namco, and Muztag) on the Tibetan Plateau, spanning January 2020 to November 2021. The model successfully reproduces the spatial distribution and seasonal cycle of δ18Ov; however, probability density functions reveal a systematic underestimation of isotopic depletion. Through a multi‐scale temporal decomposition of the daily δ18Ov time series, we attribute over 50% of the simulation error to deficiencies in representing large-scale atmospheric circulations (periods ≥ 30 days), while the remaining error is linked to synoptic-scale processes (3–7 days) associated with fractionation, including cloud microphysics, post‐condensation effects, and surface evaporation. The model's inability to accurately simulate terrain-induced atmospheric moisture blocking over the TP results in bias in atmospheric circulation variations, thereby amplifying the contribution of circulation-related processes to the overall error. These findings underscore the significance of atmospheric circulation in water vapor isotopic simulations and highlight the value of high‐resolution water vapor isotopic datasets for improving our understanding of moisture source attribution and water‐cycle dynamics in regions of complex topography.
- Preprint
(2353 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1218 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 27 Jul 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2351 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 21 Jun 2026
reply
-
EC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Mijeong Park, 22 Jun 2026
reply
Thank you, Juan, for your thoughtful comments. I think this manuscript is worth for being reviewed by the referees and by the scientific community.
I would strongly advise the authors to make the corrections to the manuscript to comply with the protocol.
Best wishes,
Mijeong
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2351-EC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Yigang Liu, 25 Jun 2026
reply
Dear Juan Antonio Añel,
We are very grateful for your comment.
For ECHAM6-wiso, the ECHAM model code is available under a version of the MPI-M software license agreement (https://www.mpimet.mpg.de/en/science/models/license/). The code of the isotopic version ECHAM6-wiso is available upon request to martin.werner@awi.de on AWI's GitLab repository at https://gitlab.awi.de/mwerner/mpi-esm-wiso (Cauquoin et al., 2019; Cauquoin and Werner, 2021).In addition, we have archived the data and analysis codes used in this study on Zennodo:Atmospheric output: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20840799Isotopic output: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20840916Observation of atmospheric variables: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20840976Observation of isotopic variables: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20841067Archived HARv2: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20841291Core analysis scripts: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20841593Kind regards,Yigang LiuCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2351-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 25 Jun 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, your reply does not satisfy the requirements. First, although we are well aware of some issues with the ECHAM model regarding not sharing their code and their license, the web page linked that you provide does not contain the mentioned license. In any case, if you are not allowed to share the model, we would expect that you provide a private repository where it is stored and can be cited, for example Zenodo private repository. Also, we can not accept need to contact persons, email addresses or Git sites to host assets. It is not clear what prevents you of sharing the ECHAM6-wiso code.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2351-CEC2
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 25 Jun 2026
reply
-
EC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Mijeong Park, 22 Jun 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 152 | 47 | 13 | 212 | 23 | 10 | 10 |
- HTML: 152
- PDF: 47
- XML: 13
- Total: 212
- Supplement: 23
- BibTeX: 10
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
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
First, in your work you use the ECHAM6-wiso model. However, in the Code and Data Availability section of your manuscript you do not provide a repository for it. Because of it your manuscript should have never been accepted for Discussions. GMD's policy clearly states that all the code and data necessary to replicate a manuscript must be published openly and freely to anyone before submission in an acceptable repository.
In addition, you have archived part of the data used in your work, namely the HARv2 data set, in a site which does not fulfil GMD’s requirements for a persistent data archive because:
- It does not appear to have a published policy for data preservation over many years or decades (some flexibility exists over the precise length of preservation, but the policy must exist).
- It does not appear to have a published mechanism for preventing authors from unilaterally removing material. Archives must have a policy which makes removal of materials only possible in exceptional circumstances and subject to an independent curatorial decision,
- It does not appear to issue a persistent identifier such as a DOI or Handle for each precise dataset.
If we have missed a published policy which does in fact address this matter satisfactorily, please post a response linking to it. If you have any questions about this issue, please post them in a reply.
The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, publish your code and data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
Later, if the Topical Editor decides to continue with the review or publication process of your manuscript and you are requested to upload a new version of it, then The 'Code and Data Availability’ section of your manuscript must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor