Recharge Impulse Spreading in Western Carpathian’s Mountainous Fissure–Karst Aquifer
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is an interesting paper about investigations of very sensitive environments like karst and fissure-karst aquifer. Many information is needed to understand the dynamics of these aquifers. Generally the paper is well written but some improvements have to be done and I hope detail comments below will help the authors.
Chapter Geographical, geological and hydrogeological background
Figure 1 - What does a blue dotted line mean? I suggest adding a legend. Add the name of the L’ubochna stream.
Figure 2 - The tectonic elements described in the chapter Geographical, geological and hydrogeological background lacks (I assume that is Chapter 2.1. I suggest adding numerals and corrections chapter numbers below). The Triassic on the Createcoeous – nappe as a result of an overthrust? I also suggest you make a hydrogeological map instead of a geological map and adding the boundaries of the catchment areas of considered springs and groundwater flow directions.
Page 2 – „On a small area on the SW, Triassic carbonates are covered by Paleogene breccias and conglomerates of carbonatic material, hydraulically interconnected with underlying Triassic rocks. „ - Not shown in Figure 2.
I suggest making a hydrogeological cross-section that will show the sequence of deposits with respect to tectonics of the study area, aquifer recharge, groundwater level, springs, groundwater flow directions.
Chapter Groundwater level and discharge observations
Specify the precision of the measuring devices (GW level, temperature). Precision of the measuring devices is important because you later discuss about very slight changes of the water temperature.
Chapter Climate characteristic of the area and observations during investigated period
Page 6 - All meteorological stations must be displayed on the map. This is much clearer than the entered positions in the text. Only their altitude should remain in the text.
Page 7 – Move the sentence: „Precipitation event of 78.9 mm that happened in 15.-16.03.2014 was in the period of limited evapotranspiration (hydrological balance report in Coplák et al. 2014) and created in important singular recharge hydraulical impulse that was not followed by similar even for a couple of weeks.“ into discussion.
Chapter Results
Figure 5 - make line graphs and remove dot marks. The picture will be more readable.
Chapter Discussion
Page 16 - The peak arrival time shifts at the Teplica springs are interpreted by a temperature gradient and a deep circulating groundwater. The water temperature at the Fatra spring is less than one degree lower than the water temperature at Teplica springs, and the peak arrival time shift is 3.5 times shorter. How do you explain this? I also think that it is necessary to explain the differences in the hydraulic diffusivity values more detail.
Figure 13 - The legend is missing. The first number indicates the groundwater temperature and the lower number is the peak arrival time shift (days), isn't it?
Author Response
First of all the authors would like to thank all the reviewers for their comments concerning the manuscript. The comments and suggestions are all very insightful, valuable and very helpful for revising and improving the quality of this paper. On the following pages are our point-by-point replies to each of the comments.
Reviewer 1
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This is an interesting paper about investigations of very sensitive environments like karst and fissure-karst aquifer. Many information is needed to understand the dynamics of these aquifers. Generally the paper is well written but some improvements have to be done and I hope detail comments below will help the authors.
Chapter Geographical, geological and hydrogeological background
Figure 1 - What does a blue dotted line mean? I suggest adding a legend. Add the name of the L’ubochna stream.
RESPONSE: Blue dotted line stands for delineation of the Kopa Mt. hydrogeological structure: Legend was added to Figure 1, and also the name of “Ľubochnianka stream”.
Figure 2 - The tectonic elements described in the chapter Geographical, geological and hydrogeological background lacks (I assume that is Chapter 2.1. I suggest adding numerals and corrections chapter numbers below). The Triassic on the Createcoeous – nappe as a result of an overthrust? I also suggest you make a hydrogeological map instead of a geological map and adding the boundaries of the catchment areas of considered springs and groundwater flow directions.
RESPONSE: Triassic on the Cretaceous is due to overthrust of hronic unit over veporic one – this information was also added to the text. Figure 2 was supplemented by hydrogeological interpretation of geological units and groundwater flow directions. Springs’ catchment areas are not clearly defined yet, and results of new trace experiments brought even more uncertainty here … as sometimes happens in karst hydrogeology.
Page 2 – „On a small area on the SW, Triassic carbonates are covered by Paleogene breccias and conglomerates of carbonatic material, hydraulically interconnected with underlying Triassic rocks. „ - Not shown in Figure 2.
RESPONSE: Paleogene breccias and conglomerates of carbonatic material are now shown in Figure 2.
I suggest making a hydrogeological cross-section that will show the sequence of deposits with respect to tectonics of the study area, aquifer recharge, groundwater level, springs, groundwater flow directions.
RESPONSE: Simplified hydrogeological cross-section was added as Figure 3.
Chapter Groundwater level and discharge observations
Specify the precision of the measuring devices (GW level, temperature). Precision of the measuring devices is important because you later discuss about very slight changes of the water temperature.
RESPONSE: Precision was specified; text “Pressure measurement accuracy of ±0.05% resulting to water level accuracy measurements of ±3 mm, temperature resolution of 0.003°C and temperature resolution ± 0.05°C is reported for this instrument.” was inserted.
Chapter Climate characteristic of the area and observations during investigated period
Page 6 - All meteorological stations must be displayed on the map. This is much clearer than the entered positions in the text. Only their altitude should remain in the text.
RESPONSE: Position of meteorological stations was supplemented to Figure 2. We consider keeping coordinates of their positions in the text to be important, as simple copying of these coordinates into many geographic / geodetic browser services enables easy finding of specified objects.
Page 7 – Move the sentence: „Precipitation event of 78.9 mm that happened in 15.-16.03.2014 was in the period of limited evapotranspiration (hydrological balance report in Coplák et al. 2014) and created in important singular recharge hydraulical impulse that was not followed by similar even for a couple of weeks.“ into discussion.
RESPONSE: The sentence was moved to Discussion.
Chapter Results
Figure 5 - make line graphs and remove dot marks. The picture will be more readable.
RESPONSE: It was intended to enhance variations in springs’ discharge measurements by the use of dots; these were later suppressed in Figures presented later in the text (e.g. Figure 11; now Figure 12).
Chapter Discussion
Page 16 - The peak arrival time shifts at the Teplica springs are interpreted by a temperature gradient and a deep circulating groundwater. The water temperature at the Fatra spring is less than one degree lower than the water temperature at Teplica springs, and the peak arrival time shift is 3.5 times shorter. How do you explain this? I also think that it is necessary to explain the differences in the hydraulic diffusivity values more detail.
RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment: as this is what was intended to be point out as the main message of the paper, we put more text into this part of discussion, as also explained here: – arrival of impulse depends on both the distance and hydraulic diffusivity. Propagation of the same impulse with 3.5 times longer time for relatively similar distance (Fatra / Teplica) should then require correspondingly lower diffusivity values OR the hydraulic distance is not so similar. Vertical groundwater movement – if existing – should make the hydraulic distance longer and also the hydraulic diffusivity values (because of vertical permeability component being usually much smaller than the horizontal one) are smaller. Vertical groundwater movement is indicated by water temperatures and is therefore consistent with the observed results. The text was enriched in this explanation.
Figure 13 - The legend is missing. The first number indicates the groundwater temperature and the lower number is the peak arrival time shift (days), isn't it?
RESPONSE: Yes, this is true – legend was added to the Figure 13 (now Figure 14) caption.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is an interesting case study, which is the analysis of a single recharge impulse spreading in Kopa Mt Fissure - Karst Aquifer, located in Western Carpathian`s Mountainous. The authors used the fully utilitarian nature of the research (identification of hydrogeological conditions in the area of the planned construction of the highway tunnel) to carry out interesting hydrogeological studies. It is a pity that, apart from strictly hydrogeological conclusions, the impact of the highway tunnel functioning on hydrogeological conditions in the area of research was not explicitly referred. It should be noted that the Authors presented, in a review, the geomorphological and hydrogeological conditions of the research area. Presentation of the results of hydrogeological and speleological researches, if they were made in this region, is limited. The authors used the research material they could collect for the recharge impulse spreading analysis in Kopa Mt. hydrogeological structure, correctly verifying and subjecting to mathematical analysis. Discussion and Conclusions, using advanced mathematical formulas, are at a high scientific level. In the Conclusions, the representativeness of Kop Mt Fissure - Karst Aquifer can be more strongly emphasized, at least on a regional scale, and for what type of hydrogeological structures and in what climatic conditions the obtained test results can be used. The following are mainly editorial comments:
1/ Materials and Methods
1.1/ Except of Figure 2. Aquifer of Kopa Mt hydrogeological structure - simplified geological map - could be a simplified geological cross-section with the location of research points
1.2/ There is no information about the hydrogeological parameters of the Kopa Fissure - Karst Aquifer associated with limestones and dolomites and about karst phenomena (including caves)
in this area. Perhaps they have not been recognized here, but there are probably results of hydrogeological research in the Massif of Great Fatra and a number of caves are located. It would be worth complementing the hydrogeological characteristics in this area.
1.3/ With relatively small changes in groundwater temperature and the groundwater table level, a short description of the registration devices together with the measurement accuracy (measurement error) would be useful.
1.4/ change TK-04 to TK-06 (page 5, 6 line from the bottom)
2/ Correct the titles of figures and tables. Titles begin with a lowercase letter. Also correct the title of Table 2, Table 7, Figure 12
3/ Organize the titles in the headings: Table 4, Table 5, Table 7
4/ References
- Kuvik, M. et al. - no quotation in the text
- Polak, M. et al. - In References there are two items 13 and 14 with the date 1997. In the text, these items have publication dates 1996 and 1997
- lack of References in the item quoted in the text Coplak et al. 2014
5/ There are no items in the quotations in the text of the editor selection: Zwahlen 2004, Stefanovic 2015 (page 1, rows 3 and 4 from the bottom)
Author Response
First of all the authors would like to thank all the reviewers for their comments concerning the manuscript. The comments and suggestions are all very insightful, valuable and very helpful for revising and improving the quality of this paper. On the following pages are our point-by-point replies to each of the comments.
Reviewer 2
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The article is an interesting case study, which is the analysis of a single recharge impulse spreading in Kopa Mt Fissure - Karst Aquifer, located in Western Carpathian`s Mountainous. The authors used the fully utilitarian nature of the research (identification of hydrogeological conditions in the area of the planned construction of the highway tunnel) to carry out interesting hydrogeological studies. It is a pity that, apart from strictly hydrogeological conclusions, the impact of the highway tunnel functioning on hydrogeological conditions in the area of research was not explicitly referred. It should be noted that the Authors presented, in a review, the geomorphological and hydrogeological conditions of the research area. Presentation of the results of hydrogeological and speleological researches, if they were made in this region, is limited. The authors used the research material they could collect for the recharge impulse spreading analysis in Kopa Mt. hydrogeological structure, correctly verifying and subjecting to mathematical analysis. Discussion and Conclusions, using advanced mathematical formulas, are at a high scientific level. In the Conclusions, the representativeness of Kop Mt Fissure - Karst Aquifer can be more strongly emphasized, at least on a regional scale, and for what type of hydrogeological structures and in what climatic conditions the obtained test results can be used. The following are mainly editorial comments:
1/ Materials and Methods
1.1/ Except of Figure 2. Aquifer of Kopa Mt hydrogeological structure - simplified geological map - could be a simplified geological cross-section with the location of research points
RESPONSE: Simplified hydrogeological cross-section was added as Figure 3.
1.2/ There is no information about the hydrogeological parameters of the Kopa Fissure - Karst Aquifer associated with limestones and dolomites and about karst phenomena (including caves) in this area. Perhaps they have not been recognized here, but there are probably results of hydrogeological research in the Massif of Great Fatra and a number of caves are located. It would be worth complementing the hydrogeological characteristics in this area.
RESPONSE: Information of karst phenomena was added to the text: it should be noted, that in this part of the Veľká Fatra Mts., only a few small caves were registered so far (reference to the register of caves in Slovakia by Bella et al. was supplemented). Nevertheless, in borehole logs plenty of solutionally enlarged fractures were observed and documented by borehole camera inspection photos (Kuvik et al., 2014). In some cases, also bigger open cavities were found as e.g. 1.3 m wide cavity in TK-06 borehole 173.7 – 175.0 m documented in Table 2.
1.3/ With relatively small changes in groundwater temperature and the groundwater table level, a short description of the registration devices together with the measurement accuracy (measurement error) would be useful.
RESPONSE: Measurement accuracy was specified by adding the text “Pressure measurement accuracy of ±0.05% resulting to water level accuracy measurements of ±3 mm, temperature resolution of 0.003°C and temperature resolution ± 0.05°C is reported for this instrument.” to Chapter 2.1.
1.4/ change TK-04 to TK-06 (page 5, 6 line from the bottom)
RESPONSE: Mistaken borehole labelling was changed respectively; thank you for thorough text inspection!
2/ Correct the titles of figures and tables. Titles begin with a lowercase letter. Also correct the title of Table 2, Table 7, Figure 12
RESPONSE: All captions of figures and tables were corrected.
3/ Organize the titles in the headings: Table 4, Table 5, Table 7
RESPONSE: Headings of these tables were adopted.
4/ References
- Kuvik, M. et al. - no quotation in the text
RESPONSE: This reference should replace quotation of Coplák et al. 2014; text was corrected.
- Polak, M. et al. - In References there are two items 13 and 14 with the date 1997. In the text, these items have publication dates 1996 and 1997
RESPONSE: Both items (map sheet / text explanations to the map) should be dated by 1997; in corrected paper version this distinguished as 1997a and 1997b and according to this also the text was revised.
- lack of References in the item quoted in the text Coplak et al. 2014
RESPONSE: This reference was replaced by quotation of Kuvik et al. 2014; text was corrected.
5/ There are no items in the quotations in the text of the editor selection: Zwahlen 2004, Stefanovic 2015 (page 1, rows 3 and 4 from the bottom)
RESPONSE: Appropriate corrections have been made in the text.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper was improved and can be accepted for publication. I only have one minor comments:
Fig 2: Please, kick out the label of Quaternary sediments from legend because these deposits are not displayed on the cross-section and also, please, kick out a single label for the Triassic carbonates because it is unnecessary twice to display the same
