The Sensitivity of a Dike-Marsh System to Sea-Level Rise—A Model-Based Exploration

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In the manuscript entitled “The sensitivity of a dike-marsh system to sea-level 2 rise — A model-based exploration”, the authors reported a model results to evaluate sensitivity of marsh-dike system in case of sea-level rise. The manuscript represents an interesting work and important results, and it can be useful for the readers of this journal. However, there are several points that need to be improved. Manuscript can be accepted after these issues are properly addressed (minor revision).

 

In general, the manuscript lacks detailed descriptions on the procedures to get the results. The readers who are not familiar in these methods may have difficulties to understand the manuscript.

 

In Introduction, the novelty of this study that is distinguished from previous studies is required to be addressed more clearly. In lines 55-56, it says “So far, few studies tried to translate processes affecting marshes into the required adaptations of dikes. The aim of this study is, therefore, to address how natural foreshores affect the future need for dike heightening”

Please introduce previous studies with similar researches in detail, and focus novelty of this study more clearly.

 

In Iines 57-58, the authors considered sediment availability, marsh erosion and compaction on dike, along with sea level rise, as controlling factors for the experiments. It is required to address the reasons for specifically choosing these parameters in detail (the parameters listed in Table 1). In addition, other feasible parameters that might affect the results should be addressed with reasons for exclusion.

 

Please explain how to estimate using fall velocity, tidal asymmetry and erosion (Lines 227 – 228).

 

Please provide detailed procedures to calculate the dike reinforcement in section 3.5. It is difficult to understand them if the algorithms or formulas adopted in this experiments are not familiar. Please also explain how the SWAN outputs were used in this process.

 

In section 3.2, the procedures to estimate dike reinforcement rate are described. But I do not understand why ‘the amount of marsh retreat’ has to be considered in the scenario. In other words, I can understand the procedures 1, 2, and 4 in Figure 2. However, I cannot understand why procedure 3 should be considered. Maybe I have missed some key points in this study, but it is required to clarify them, for readers like me.

 

Line 135, it says “the mash platform inundates faster and the rate of the rate of storm surge …” One of the ‘the rate of’ should be deleted.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

As far as I may understand, the paper reflects a honest work of modelling a rather complicated phenomenon. Indeed, the results are significant, in the sense that they may represent a relevant input to people concerned with the sea-shore protection. The large amount of references puts it in a relevant scientific framework.

I have no particular remarks: in the attached copy of the paper you find a pair of stick-notes suggesting to fix some very small aspect.

Apart from them, in my opinion, no further revision is due before publication.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf