Deep-water hydrodynamic observations of two moorings sites on the continental slope of the southern Adriatic Sea (Mediterranean Sea)

Paladini de Mendoza, Francesco; Schroeder, Katrin; Langone, Leonardo; Chiggiato, Jacopo; Borghini, Mireno; Giordano, Patrizia; Verazzo, Giulio; Miserocchi, Stefano

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-5617-2022

Articles | Volume 14, issue 12

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-5617-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-5617-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 14, issue 12

Data description paper

|

20 Dec 2022

Data description paper |

| 20 Dec 2022

Deep-water hydrodynamic observations of two moorings sites on the continental slope of the southern Adriatic Sea (Mediterranean Sea)

Francesco Paladini de Mendoza, Katrin Schroeder, Leonardo Langone, Jacopo Chiggiato, Mireno Borghini, Patrizia Giordano, Giulio Verazzo, and Stefano Miserocchi

Download

Final revised paper (published on 20 Dec 2022)
Preprint (discussion started on 07 Jul 2022)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on essd-2022-209', Athanasia Iona, 01 Aug 2022

The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://essd.copernicus.org/preprints/essd-2022-209/essd-2022-209-RC1-supplement.pdf

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2022-209-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Francesco Paladini de Mendoza, 29 Aug 2022
  
  We thank the reviewer for this useful comment, which helped us to improve the manuscript.
  Following the answers for each comments
  A1: We have added a sentence to address this about the advantage of long-term high-resolution monitoring approach and its benefit that this activity can produce to other projects. (Lines 280-284 & 310-316)
  A2: The two sites are part of EMSO-ERIC from 10/2021 but the website of EMSO-ERIC is not yet updated with the BB and FF site information. The text in the manuscript has been changed with more precise information about this. (Lines 63-65)
  A3: The section has been expanded with more detailed information about maintenance, calibration and other instrument procedure. (Lines 98-104)
  A4: The original sentence was confused and in the revised version we wrote a new one about the description of sensors accuracy. (Lines 90-94)
  A5: There isn’t any metadata report but only the attributes inside the NetCDF files. The metadata description is modified in the revised version (lines 123-128)
  A6: In the revised version we have expanded the FAIR concept related to our dataset (lines 137-143)
  A7: In the metadata in the global attributes reported the source of the keyword’s vocabulary (SeaDataNet parameter discovery vocabulary) and also conventions used (OceanSITES v1.4, SeaDataNet_1.0, COARDS, CF-1.6). In the revised version the description is implemented with this information. (lines 139-141)
  A8 and 9: The data quality section number is changed to 2.3 and we have mentioned what tools are used for quality control (lines 157)
  A10: Yes, in future releases we plan to include comparison with other existing data and climatology, we also added this in the revised version. (lines 312-313)
  A11: In the caption of Table 2 we added the link to the L20 Seadatanet qualifier flag table and we have added the suggested reference. Between 162 and 165 the description is expanded.
  A12: After QC applied by PG80 criterion the value that exceed the threshold are changed to NaN and the flag number in column 11 is 5 as described in the table 2. All data are maintained in the dataset and the original data are reported in the column 12-13-14 with the assigned flag 0 because No quality control procedure has been applied. In the revised version a clearer explanation is provided (Lines 166-171)
  A13: One is the website page of the dataset and the other one is the registered DOI. The sentence in the revised version is changed with only one address (Lines 318-319).
  A14: The figure is edited as suggested
  A15: In the original manuscript the description is wrong, the column with header -qc for CTD, correspond only to the flag code of each variable. The description is changed in the revised version. (Lines 132-134)
  A16: not only good data are kept but all data are reported except when the probe is outside the water and not at the correct mooring depth. The flag 9 is assigned when data is missing. We have specified this also in the revised version (Lines 183-184)
  A17-40 all text corrections has been edited and also the references
  A41: I have added the link of L20 and I have modified the citation on the text. The sentence in the revised version has been modified. (Lines 162-165)
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2022-209-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on essd-2022-209', Anonymous Referee #2, 02 Aug 2022
General overview

The presented work of 8-years ocean monitoring activities on the western Southern Adriatic Sea is based on two moorings, systematically maintained since 2012, located at representative sites for different ocean-dynamics conditions. As the continuous measurements at ocean are scarce, the value of these timeseries is important to improve, not only the knowledge of the dynamics of the area, but their evolution along the time and their possible responses to the climatic changes and/or regional variability.

The authors made an strong effort to detail and explain the followed methodology. In this sense, assessing the data quality, descriptions of methodologies, test and criteria are extremely important to facilitate the usability of the timeseries the robustness of the results.

It is expected that the observatory and the moorings will be maintained along the time and linked to EU initiatives as EMSO-ERIC or Hydrochanges (cited along the text between others). It is also expected that data set will be periodically updated. The availability of these will benefit not only to the scientific community but the local ones, as a better knowledge will report in better sustainable uses for the area.

Despite all this, before the final publication of this paper, I would like to draw the authors' attention to the following aspects:

Comments

The authors describe the configuration of the observatory and 6-months recovery activities. It could be also useful a brief description of the maintenance methodology that is, undoubtedly, more that change batteries and cleaning the instrumentation. I am quite sure that along 8 years, some sensors and instruments have been calibrated and/or replaced. Some explanation about the calibration processes could be very useful in order to reuse the timeseries, especially when they try to detect decadal to interdecadal signals, as they could do in a near future.

Regarding to the previous point, the instrument description, lines 81-93 (accuracy, etc) could be easily readable if it is displayed in a table. The authors should evaluate the convenience or not of this suggestion.

In relation to the dataset at zenodo repository, I find and download the 4 netcdf files, but I am not able to find the reports: “dataset information (DI)” neither “variables in dataset (VD)” described in the paper. It could be my fault, but please check it and add them in case. Mentioned FAIR data principles include more than giving DOIs and making them accessible (downloadable), but provide the relating information to facilitate the reusing of them. Then, these 2 files are important. I also suppose they include descriptions of the vocabularies standards descriptions which are mentioned in the paper.

Text editing issues for consideration

Some references are missing. Please, check: Gacic et al 2002; Civitarese et al 2005; Mihanovic et al 2013; Crniel et al 2016; Seadatanet, 2010; Vilibic and Supic 2005.

I cannot find along the text the reference to Bignami et al, 1990. It appears in the reference list.

For manuscript coherence, please substitute “meters” for “m”, i.e. line 55 and line 74, and “seconds” for “s” (line 84).

Regarding the salinity, please, decide if adding PSU (i.e. line 176) or not (i.e. line 175 and others along the text). This criterion should be maintained a summary table 5.

Line 104. Please, add the unit (s?) to the sampling interval 10800.

Line 155. Please add the reference to table 2 that, probably, is missing.

Also, for coherence, please decide if the intervals are typeset as “-5 -45” (line 87), “100 and 225” (line 211) or “(140-150)” (line 270).
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2022-209-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Francesco Paladini de Mendoza, 29 Aug 2022
  
  We thank the reviewer for these useful comments, which helped us to improve the manuscript. The revised version of the manuscript will contain the following answers to your comments and suggestions.
  A1: The description about the recovery activities and sensor calibration and replacing has been expanded in the revised version. We have added also in table 1 the S/N of CTD sensors used (lines 98-104)
  A2: The original description in the revised version has been changed to a new one more clear (Line 90-94)
  A3: There isn’t any metadata report but only attributes in the netcdf files, there is a misunderstanding due to a not good writing in the original manuscript. The description of the metadata is modified in the revised version and within metadata in the global attributes are specified the source of the keywords_vocabulary (SeaDataNet parameter discovery vocabulary) and also conventions used (OceanSITES v1.4,SeaDataNet_1.0,COARDS,CF-1.6). (Lines 123-128)
  Text editing issues:
  A1-7: All text corrections suggested have been edited and the references are corrected and updated
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2022-209-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

AR by Francesco Paladini de Mendoza on behalf of the Authors (03 Oct 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (09 Oct 2022) by Simona Simoncelli

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (13 Oct 2022)

RR by Athanasia Iona (20 Oct 2022)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (03 Nov 2022) by Simona Simoncelli

AR by Francesco Paladini de Mendoza on behalf of the Authors (12 Nov 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (15 Nov 2022) by Simona Simoncelli

AR by Francesco Paladini de Mendoza on behalf of the Authors (16 Nov 2022) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

This work presents the dataset of continuous monitoring in the southern Adriatic Margin, providing a unique observatory of deep-water dynamics. The study area is influenced by episodic dense-water cascading, which is a fundamental process for water renewal and deep-water dynamics. Information about the frequency and intensity variations of these events is observed along a time series. The monitoring activities are still ongoing and the moorings are part of the EMSO-ERIC network.