Comment on “seasonal and Nodal Variations of Predominant Tidal Constituents in the Global Ocean” by in Continental Shelf Research 217

Zhiyun Du,Qian Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2021.104524

IF: 2.629

2021-01-01

Continental Shelf Research

Abstract:Cao et al. (2021) report their discovery of invariant M2 seasonal signals and argue that a superposition of the astronomical tides M2, H1 and H2 is responsible for seasonal M2 variations described in previous studies. Accordingly, other possible mechanisms such as seasonal stratification (e.g., Müller et al., 2014) may be unconvincing. However, the amplitudes of astronomical H1 and H2 constituents are only 0.33% and 0.31% of the M2 component, respectively, as is indicated by the theory of equilibrium tide, suggesting trivial contributions (~0.64%) to the seasonal M2 variations. Here, adopting a 30-day time window in harmonic analysis of the record from six tide gauges, we identified a noticeable M2 modulation, i.e., >1.7% over a period of around 12 months. We also used a two-year time window, as suggested by Cao et al. (2021), but found that the ratios of the H1 and H2 amplitudes to the M2 component are much larger than the theoretical values, indicating the “H1 and H2 tides” obtained in this manner are not of astronomical origin. Thus, we suggest that their proposed mechanism about seasonal M2 variation is erroneous for the areas where exists noticeable M2 modulation; instead, the mechanisms (i.e., seasonal stratification and sea-ice friction) they denied provide a better interpretation in terms of the physics of the tide.