Methane in the Danube Delta: the importance of spatial patterns and diel cycles for atmospheric emission estimates

Canning, Anna; Wehrli, Bernhard; Körtzinger, Arne

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3961-2021

Articles | Volume 18, issue 12

https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3961-2021

© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3961-2021

© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 12

Research article

|

01 Jul 2021

Research article |

| 01 Jul 2021

Methane in the Danube Delta: the importance of spatial patterns and diel cycles for atmospheric emission estimates

Anna Canning, Bernhard Wehrli, and Arne Körtzinger

Download

Final revised paper (published on 01 Jul 2021)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 17 Oct 2020)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Nov 2020
- AC1: 'Responses to Anonymous Referee #1', Anna Canning, 22 Dec 2020
RC2: 'Review of Canning et al. Methane in the Danube Delta, BG-2020-353', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Dec 2020
- AC2: 'Responses to Anonymous Referee #2', Anna Canning, 22 Dec 2020

Peer-review completion

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

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (31 Dec 2020) by Fortunat Joos

Dear authors

Your manuscript has been assessed by two reviewers who both judged your work of valuable scientific significance and scientific quality. Both reviewers expressed concerns regarding the presentation of your work. They both provide very low ratings for the “quality of the presentation”. Both recommend major revisions.

Your response to the review comments is welcome and I agree to focus the manuscript on CH4 only. I am looking forward to seeing your new graphics illustrating your results, the results from the statistical tests, and a more detailed description of the upscaling approach. I also welcome that too-far reaching conclusions, e.g., regarding diel cycle and sampling, are deleted. A discussion on the gas exchange velocity parameterization and related uncertainties should be provided. Potential shortcomings of the parameterization of the transfer velocity and the way the velocity is computed, e.g., by using wind speed data from a nearby station and not in-situ wind measurements, should be briefly discussed.

Following the reviewers’ suggestion, I am happy to invite you to submit a revised manuscript and a revised author’s response. The manuscript and response will be sent out for review.

Please follow the submission guidelines of the journal regarding the response: “The author's response in case of "minor" or "major" revisions must be submitted as one separate *.pdf file (indicating page and line numbers), structured in a clear and easy-to-follow sequence: (1) comments from referees/public, (2) author's response, and (3) author's changes in manuscript. Regarding author's changes, a marked-up manuscript version (track changes in Word, latexdiff in LaTeX) converted into *.pdf and combined with the author's response should be provided.

Thank you for submitting your work to Biogeosciences. With kind regards,

Fortunat Joos

PS: It seems that there is a wrong reference (line 144 instead of line 114?) in your response to point 1 of referee #1.

Hide

AR by Anna Canning on behalf of the Authors (08 Apr 2021) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (14 Apr 2021) by Fortunat Joos

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (03 May 2021)

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (03 May 2021) by Fortunat Joos

AR by Anna Canning on behalf of the Authors (10 May 2021) Author's response Manuscript

Download

Article (5149 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

Inland waters are usually not well restrained in terms of greenhouse gas measurements. One of these regions is the Danube Delta, Romania. Therefore, we measured continuously with sensors to collect high-resolution data for CH₄ and O₂ throughout the Delta. We found significant variation for all concentrations over the day and night and between regions, as well as large spatial variation throughout all regions, with large CH₄ concentrations flowing in from the reed beds to the lakes.