Horizontal eddy viscosity1 m2s−1Horizontal eddy diffusivity20 m2s−1
Can you justify the use of such different values for horizontal eddy viscosity and eddy diffusivity? As far as i Know the turbulent Prandtl number, defined as the ratio between eddy viscosity and eddy diffusivity should be close to 1.
Red and black lines represent results for the modeled andmeasured daily-scale values, respectively, while blue and green represent results for the modeledand measured instantaneous-scale values, respectively.
In both figure S1 and S2 there are no red or blue lines. adding these colors as written in the text would let the plots more readable
For the model boundary conditions, the eighteen main tidal har-208monics (M2, S2, SA, Q1, O1, P1, K1, 2N2, MU2, N2, NU2, L2, T2, R2, K2, MN4, M4,209MS4) obtained from the model Oregon State Tidal Prediction (Egbert & Erofeeca, 2002)210were used as the astronomical forcing (water levels) at the o shore boundary
The Oregon State Tidal Prediction model should provide also the barotropic velocity components due to tides. Why didn't you use also these variables as boundary conditions?
It can be partially concluded that that neglecting the waves in the outer522basins of bays that are not signi cantly protected from wave action can lead to signif-523icant errors.
This sentence should be revised. Neglecting waves lead to significant errors in which variables? all or only some of them? This work clearly shows that waves can influence the hydrodynamic in some areas of the bay, especially in the outer basin and near inlet 2, but I think that a conclusion that neglecting waves can lead to significant errors should be supported by comparison of the model output with some observations (sea level, u ,v , Temp and Salt) that demonstrates the benefits of including waves in the simulation. I suggest to modify the sentence or to add some statistical index quantifying the improvement of the simulation with waves compared with the one without waves. This also is connected to the sentence in the conclusion at line 606
values of the radiation stress gradients (f)
plot f) of the radiation stress gradients is missing
Density (a), salinity (b) and temperature (c) distributions along the bay transect
It is straightforward from figures title but the a, b and c references of the figures are missing. As in line 206 the C of Celsius degree is missing in the temperature plot.
Wave (d) and wind (e) roses at thestudy site
What is the reference period of wave and wind data shown here? Is it the same period of the model simulations? Is the percentage shown representing the percentage of time in which those conditions are present considering the entire observation time? I suggest to add these information in the text.
Location of study site, dashed blue line corresponds to the contour of the meshof the Cadiz Bay
I can't see the dashed blue line in figure 1a
Panel d) shows thenon-dimensional humidity (blue), solar radiation (red), rainfall (yellow) and evaporation (purple)
This is the same caption of figure 3. It must be changed with wave height and Direction.
Density (a), salinity (b) and temperature (c) variations along the bay transectwhen waves are considere
Same issue of figure 3. the letter references in the plot are missing
The correlation ranges from 0 (no240correlation) to 1 (complete correlation).
The correlation can be negative. It ranges from -1 (anti-correlation) to 0 (no correlation) up to 1 (total correlation). I suggest to correct the definitions.
Wind conditions (data from Buoy 2342, Puertos del Estado, Spanish Ministry of141Public Works; Fig. 1e) are stronger and predominantly north-westerly from January to142April due to the trade winds.
Can you explain me this sentence? Trade winds may explain the E or NE direction of the wind. Looking also at the spreading of the wind in the W-NW directions in figure 1e and at the positioning of the cost, it seems that W-NW wind direction could be attributed to breeze.
However, the hydrodynamics of inner basins is com-57monly driven only by wind, tides and/or baroclinic ows that are mainly triggered by58solar radiation and strati cation, since river discharges of fresh water are usually neg-59ligible in bays, in contrast to alluvial estuaries (Savenije, 2005; Dez-Minguito et al., 2012,602013; Serrano et al., 2020)
Are you talking of bays in general or only Spanish bays? I don't know, maybe most of the Spanish bays have a negligible contribution from freshwater? However there are places where the freshwater contribution in lagoon is very common, e.g. many lagoons discharging in the Baltic sea (Curonian lagoon, Vistula lagoon, ...). Can you be more specific?
0.45
C in Celsius degree is missing
hat
Do you mean "than"?
igs. 4a
I think here you want to refer to fig. 4b1 isn't it?
R2is correlation
R squared is the determination coefficient, that is the squared value of the correlation coefficient and is different from the definition given before (line 238-239). What is the actual value of table 1?
15
The C of Celsius degree is missing
RMSE ="1NNXn=1(On Mn)2#1=2
The common definition of RMSE for the term between brackets is Model output minus Observation. This however does not affect the result
The model198grid is curvilinear (Fig. 1a) with a minimum cell size of 2020 m2. For this particular199study, the grid was re ned in both Carracas and Sancti-Petri Creeks (Fig. 1a) to cap-200ture in more detail the circulation through these creeks between the inner bay and the201open ocean. This re nement was also used to reduce the inaccuracies of the drying/ ooding202modeling (threshold depth of 0.1 m) at these shallower areas, where the intertidal zones203are proportionally larger
The definition of the numerical grid is not totally clear. There are no clear correspondences between figure 1a and the highlighted test. The cell size 20x20 is the one in B or C of figure 1a? and why there is no grid in the creeks in figure 1a? How is defined the grid in the outer domain (A in figure 1a)? Is it the same of B?
7000 h
I think it is better to use SI units.