Regional coupled surface–subsurface hydrological model fitting based on a spatially distributed minimalist reduction of frequency domain discharge data

Flipo, Nicolas; Gallois, Nicolas; Schuite, Jonathan

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-353-2023

Articles | Volume 16, issue 1

https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-353-2023

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-353-2023

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 16, issue 1

Methods for assessment of models

|

13 Jan 2023

Methods for assessment of models |

| 13 Jan 2023

Regional coupled surface–subsurface hydrological model fitting based on a spatially distributed minimalist reduction of frequency domain discharge data

Nicolas Flipo, Nicolas Gallois, and Jonathan Schuite

Download

Final revised paper (published on 13 Jan 2023)
Preprint (discussion started on 14 Apr 2022)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1: 'Comment on gmd-2022-24', Anonymous Referee #1, 25 Aug 2022

Line 63

(ii) instead of (iii)

Line 86

mHm is more an hydrological, rathe than LSM, better cite CLM, used by Kollet who is cited before.

Line 161

Please add “The following” before expression (2) because I was looking for a previous expression.

Figure 2 and lines around 156

I wonder what velocity is for almost 200 km (between Auxerre and Paris) in about 5 hours, 40 km/h? I think that a more detailed discussion is necessary regarding the concept of travel, transfer and concentration time in light of the many works in the last years. Especially if we also deal with matter and quality issues. Between the de Marsily blueprint of 1978 and now, a lot of work has been done.

The thesis of Golaz-Cavazzi and the paper in WRR of the first author is a bit too short basis.

Line 178

No words are spent for explaining how AET is computed.

Muchlater from figure 5 I guess AET is estimated as a fitting parameter with MCMC, but it has to be described much before, when main fluxes are described.

Line 184

Also regarding vadose zone, inherently nonlinear, the use of the Nash model has to be discussed more in detail with the relevant literature. The two parameters can adjust even a wrong model …

Line 225

The interpretation of hydrological time series how is dealt with Fourier transforms? There are citations, but some description inside the paper could be helpful.

Line 239

Beside rainfall, is there any snowfall?

Line 249

Streamflow gauging, better specify it

Line 364

Total instead of total

Line 520

The comparison with papers not belonging to the group is restricted to paragraph 5.2, More comparisons are needed.

Concluding my review I should like to see also some more description of the technique of frequency domain reduction, I rad all the paper waiting to have some more info.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-24-RC1
RC2: 'Comment on gmd-2022-24', Anonymous Referee #2, 19 Oct 2022

225. A pictorial description containing the input, model(function or equation) and output relation (like Figure 3.) to describe the

HYdrological MInimalist Transfer function method would be really helpful for readers to get a solid overview of this method.

230. As said earlier, it will be really helpful to get link between paremters that control the shape of the transfer function as decribed on line 230

with the transfer fucntion. You can state the equation and explain the paramaters clearly.

249. Change gauging stations to streamflow gauging stations. (change all other lines with only gauging stations too).

364. Correct "totla" to total.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-24-RC2
AC1: 'Comment on gmd-2022-24', Nicolas Flipo, 21 Oct 2022

Please find hereby our replies to the two reviewers' comments.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-24-AC1

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Nicolas Flipo on behalf of the Authors (07 Nov 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (17 Nov 2022) by Charles Onyutha

Dear Authors,
Thank you for submission of your revised manuscript.

I realized that both reviewers requested for explanations regarding clarity of some aspects in your manuscript and unfortunately you did not elaborately attend to the several comments of both reviewers as required.

For instance, Reviewer 1 requested for (i) some description of how the AET was computed, (ii) a need for the use of the Nash model which has to be discussed more in detail with the relevant literature, (iii) description and interpretation of hydrological time series with respect to Fourier Transforms, and (iv) a need for more comparative analysis regarding how you relate your work with those of others not necessarily from your group. Reviewer 2 requested you to (i) provide a pictorial description of HYdrological MInimalist Transfer function method, and (ii) state and explain the link between parameters that control the shape of the transfer function.

Unfortunately, your responses to the above comments of both reviewers comprised your defenses in line with the length of the paper as well as the claim for readership. I do agree with the reviewers especially regarding the need to ensure your work is clear for the ease of reproducibility. Simply referring to other people's work on methods which you used in your manuscript is not good enough for readers to fully understand and apply the method in your paper.

Therefore, I recommend that you take time, revise your manuscript while carefully addressing the various comments of both reviewers 1 and 2. If your worry is on the length of the paper (since it is not a description paper), I recommend that you submit the relevant text in response to the comments of the reviewers as supplementary material to your manuscript.

I hope so much in your cooperation to enable me reach a final decision on your manuscript.

Thanks

Hide

AR by Nicolas Flipo on behalf of the Authors (21 Dec 2022) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

A new approach is proposed to fit hydrological or land surface models, which suffer from large uncertainties in terms of water partitioning between fast runoff and slow infiltration from small watersheds to regional or continental river basins. It is based on the analysis of hydrosystem behavior in the frequency domain, which serves as a basis for estimating water flows in the time domain with a physically based model. It opens the way to significant breakthroughs in hydrological modeling.