Modeling inorganic carbon dynamics in  the Seine River continuum in France

Marescaux, Audrey; Thieu, Vincent; Gypens, Nathalie; Silvestre, Marie; Garnier, Josette

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2379-2020

Articles | Volume 24, issue 5

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2379-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2379-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 24, issue 5

Research article

|

11 May 2020

Research article |

| 11 May 2020

Modeling inorganic carbon dynamics in the Seine River continuum in France

Audrey Marescaux, Vincent Thieu, Nathalie Gypens, Marie Silvestre, and Josette Garnier

Download

Final revised paper (published on 11 May 2020)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 17 Dec 2019)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'comments on the manuscript "Modeling inorganic carbon dynamics in the Seine River continuum in France"', Anonymous Referee #1, 13 Jan 2020
- AC1: 'Reply to RC1', Audrey Marescaux, 11 Feb 2020
RC2: 'review #2', Anonymous Referee #2, 14 Jan 2020
- AC2: 'Reply to RC2', Audrey Marescaux, 11 Feb 2020
- AC4: 'Additional answers to the previous answer A3', Audrey Marescaux, 14 Feb 2020
RC3: 'Comment on "Modeling inorganic carbon dynamics in the Seine"', Anonymous Referee #3, 29 Jan 2020
- AC3: 'Reply to RC3', Audrey Marescaux, 11 Feb 2020

Peer-review completion

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

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (17 Feb 2020) by Anas Ghadouani

AR by Audrey Marescaux on behalf of the Authors (20 Feb 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (04 Mar 2020) by Anas Ghadouani

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (08 Mar 2020)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

General comments:
I can see the authors have incorporated the comments from previous review and revised the manuscript accordingly. Improvements can be seen especially in the introduction and discussion. However, some fundamental issues have not been solved yet. For example, most of the manuscript focused on the model description and results. But the model is not new as the model has been applied to Seine River network before (see Laruelle et al. 2019), I think the authors need the clarify why you are repeating the work in different years, and what are the new scientific values from this work compared to the previous model applications. Also, although the author declare they have improved the text writing, there are still issues in the text that lowered the quality of the manuscript. The carbon budget in river systems is important to the global carbon cycle and this paper could make a substantial contribution to this topic, so I encourage the authors to improve the manuscript again to make this work a remarkable one.

Specific comments:
Line 20: process based -> process-based
Line 21: supplemented by -> supplemented with
Line 35: Metabolism -> Results from metabolism analysis
Line 68-71: still hard to understand this statement; eutrophic systems are usually oversaturated with pCO2 respect to atmosphere;
Line 100-101: why not merge this paragraph with previous paragraph? Also, I think the work of Laruelle et al 2019 should be mentioned here as the content of this paper is similar to Laruelle et al. 2019
Line 477-478: these lines are better to go in next section 3.2
Line 725-744: conclusion are a bit rough and just repeating the numbers of results. It is important to highlight the scientific values of your research and why your research is different to others.

Hide

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (28 Mar 2020)

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (30 Mar 2020)

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (01 Apr 2020) by Anas Ghadouani

AR by Audrey Marescaux on behalf of the Authors (08 Apr 2020) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

Rivers have been recognized as an active part of the carbon cycle where transformations are associated with CO₂ outgassing. To understand it, we propose a modeling approach with the biogeochemical model, pyNuts-Riverstrahler. We implemented it on the human-impacted Seine River. Sources of carbon to the river were characterized by field measurements in groundwater and in wastewater. Outgassing was the most important in streams, and peaks were simulated downstream of wastewater treatment effluent.