Ensemble reconstruction of spatio-temporal extreme low-flow events in France since 1871

Caillouet, Laurie; Vidal, Jean-Philippe; Sauquet, Eric; Devers, Alexandre; Graff, Benjamin

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2923-2017

Articles | Volume 21, issue 6

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2923-2017

© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2923-2017

© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 21, issue 6

Research article

|

15 Jun 2017

Research article |

| 15 Jun 2017

Ensemble reconstruction of spatio-temporal extreme low-flow events in France since 1871

Laurie Caillouet, Jean-Philippe Vidal, Eric Sauquet, Alexandre Devers, and Benjamin Graff

Download

Final revised paper (published on 15 Jun 2017)
Preprint (discussion started on 31 Aug 2016)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Referee Comment', Anonymous Referee #1, 13 Oct 2016
- AC1: 'Reply to Referee #1', Laurie Caillouet, 20 Dec 2016
RC2: 'Review of the paper "Ensemble reconstruction of spatio-temporal extreme low-flow events in France since 1871", by Caillouet, Vidal, Sauquet, Devers & Graff.', Thibault Mathevet, 15 Oct 2016
- AC2: 'Reply to Referee #2', Laurie Caillouet, 20 Dec 2016
RC3: 'Reviewer comments', Anonymous Referee #3, 21 Oct 2016
- AC3: 'Reply to Referee #3', Laurie Caillouet, 20 Dec 2016

Peer-review completion

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

ED: Publish subject to revisions (further review by Editor and Referees) (02 Jan 2017) by Kerstin Stahl

AR by Laurie Caillouet on behalf of the Authors (28 Feb 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (02 Mar 2017) by Kerstin Stahl

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (04 Apr 2017)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Ensemble reconstruction of spatio-temporal extreme low-flow events in France since 1871

The work done by the authors has improved readability. There remain some issues of over-wording that once addressed will improve readability further. I am happy to accept once these are complete. There is a lot of detail in the paper so this is important. Also I suggest adding to the uncertainties/limitations that no assessment of changing channel morphology has been undertaken.
Abstract
Line 4 – no need to use In order
Line 7 – delete a from a continuous
Line 11 – is established rather than is then set up
Line 12 – delete in order
Line 12/13 – delete for the first time
Line 14 – these are not initial results – you are publishing them. Suggest ‘Results highlight well known...’
Line 15 – contribute to improving
Page 1
Line 23/24 – For adapting to climate change.....
Page 2
Line 1 – do these events provide a basis for anticipating future change? Suggest deleting for anticipating future.
Line 3 – delete in databases
Line 8 – delete , and
Line 9 – has been developed
Line 14 – delete with a hydrometric modelling chain
Page 3
Line 21 – Some studies have looked at....
Line 21 – delete but has barely been used
Line 25 – have also been developed – delete even
Line 27 – no study has undertaken a....
Line 27-28 – what do you mean by homogeneous here? Poor data?
Line 29 – presents rather than proposes
Line 31 – what are combined specificities? Are these aims or objectives
Pg 4
Line 13 suggestion: A set of 662 near-natural catchments from across France was selected for hydrological modelling and study of extreme low-flow events. These were derived from two existing datasets:
- X number of catchments were taken from the French low flow network. This network consists of.....
- X number of catchments were taken from Catalogne et al. (2014) who previously identified a set of 632 gauging stations meeting the following criteria.....
Line 21 suggestion: Two case study catchments with contrasting regimes and long observational records are selected to exemplify results in Sect. 3.1 and Sect. 5. These are the Correze....
Page 5
Line 2: suggest to delete ‘and notably for’
Line 13 – state the common period
Line 14 suggest: There is a slight overestimation of precipitation in spring (approx. 10% of Safran precipitation) and an under/over-estimation (within 1oC) of summer/winter mean temperature respectively.

Page 6
Line 3: integrate this line into the previous paragraph
Line 16: delete moreover
Line 18: warm up period is used not considered.
It would be useful to state more clearly WHY you construct both Safran and SCOPE Hydro.

Page 9
Line 9/10: suggest: The sub-division of France into HERs follows recent research (....).
Line 21: leads to pooling
Some cross referencing of captions between figs 4 and 5 are needed. Would also be useful to have fig 4 marked with a, b, etc. similar to Fig 5
Page 20-line 14 – what are retroactions?
All fine to page 26
Page 26 – sentence 23/24 needs to be reworked.
As does line 25
Page 28 – not sure what you mean by line 29 ...as far as possible?
Page 29 – delete first senstence of section 6.6
Page 29 This work proposes? This work has delivered/provided
Page 30 line 5 Sounds surprised that benchmark events found as early as the 19th century. Shouldnt be a surprise – but you work now allows them to be used to stress test plans.
Page 30 line 6 Reword the start of this sentence. Maybe....Use of recent events (e.g. 2003) for building worst case scenarios for adaptation planning should be reconsidered in light of the results presented here.

Hide

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (13 Apr 2017)

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (06 May 2017) by Kerstin Stahl

AR by Laurie Caillouet on behalf of the Authors (13 May 2017) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

The historical depth of streamflow observations in France is extended through daily hydrometeorogical reconstructions from 1871 onwards over a large set of near-natural catchments. Innovative approaches are proposed to identify and intercompare extreme low-flow events from these reconstructions, both in time and across France in a homogeneous way over more than 140 years. Analyses bring forward recent well-known events like 1976 and 1989–1990 but also much older ones like 1878 and 1893.