An ice sheet model of reduced complexity for paleoclimate studies

Neff, Basil; Born, Andreas; Stocker, Thomas F.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-397-2016

Articles | Volume 7, issue 2

https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-397-2016

© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-397-2016

© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 7, issue 2

Research article

|

26 Apr 2016

Research article |

| 26 Apr 2016

An ice sheet model of reduced complexity for paleoclimate studies

Basil Neff, Andreas Born, and Thomas F. Stocker

Download

Final revised paper (published on 26 Apr 2016)
Preprint (discussion started on 11 Aug 2015)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC C559: 'Review of Neff et al.', Bas de Boer, 18 Sep 2015
- AC C626: 'Response to Interactive comment on “An ice sheet model of reduced complexity for paleoclimate studies” from Bas de Boer', Andreas Born, 06 Oct 2015
RC C618: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #2, 03 Oct 2015
- AC C675: 'Response to Interactive comment on “An ice sheet model of reduced complexity for paleoclimate studies” from Anonymous Referee #2', Andreas Born, 12 Oct 2015

Peer-review completion

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

AR by Andreas Born on behalf of the Authors (24 Dec 2015) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (21 Jan 2016) by Henk A. Dijkstra

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (31 Jan 2016)

RR by (13 Feb 2016)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Comments to reply

First of all I would like to mention that the author has been very thorough in going through both reviews. Most of the remarks are well taken care of or properly explained. I do have a few comments on the reply, given below:

• Point 3: I think you explained this very well. This should also be stated in the introduction in the same way!

• Point 4: Good response and properly described in the current version of the manuscript.

• Point 10: It is good to keep the structure of section 4 this way. Please include a sentence in Section 4.2 then about the reasoning of performing the PI tests, as have you stated in the reply.

• As is generally used in the literature I strongly recommend you do replace mSLE with m s. l. e. everywhere in the manuscript. Explain the acronym the first time it is used on page 12: “... is not equal to 0 meter sea level equivalent (m s. l. e.). “

Minor comments on revised manuscript

Page 2
Line 6: Perhaps the full sentence: “Bedrock ... volume” can be left out.

Page 3
L6: Change ‘more recently’ to ‘over the past 800 kyr’.
L 17: Change ‘Topographic changes’ to ‘Changes in topography’.
L 18: Change ‘changes’ to ‘alter’.

Page 9
L 14-15: Mention in this sentence that you refer here to the simulations that use the GCM climate forcing of the LGM.

Page 12
L 19: Remove sentence: “All ice ... (SLE)”.
L 21: Change to: is not equal to 0 meter sea level equivalent (m s. l. e.).

Page 13
Could you make the title of section 3 shorter please?
Change to something like: ‘Idealized simulations using EISMINT’

Page 14
L 4: Replace ‘irreducible’ with ‘negligible’.
L 19: Why use here liter as a unit? Change to m¬3.

Page 21
L 20: Replace ‘mio’ with million.

Page 25
I think it would be good to mark the end points of the fast cooling/warming experiments more clearly in Figure 13. Indicate for example with a cross or square box, in the colour of the specific experiment (blue for decrease, red for increase). Also, to make figure 13 easier to interpret, remove the arrows form the background figure, and add (smaller) arrows to the experiments illustrated in this figure. If possible, refer to these points in the text more directly...

Page 26
L 21: change to cannot

Page 29
L 6-7: I think here, only the reference to Le Meur and Huybrechts is sufficient.

Page 31
L 26: resources

Page 32
L 1: Remove de Boer (2014) here, this is only ice-sheet model.

Figure 6
First explain panel a), then panels b-d.

Figure 13
See comments for page 25 above.

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by Editor) (21 Feb 2016) by Henk A. Dijkstra

AR by Andreas Born on behalf of the Authors (01 Mar 2016) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (07 Mar 2016) by Henk A. Dijkstra