FIGURE LEGENDS
Figure \(1\): A) Variations in empirical pdf of the log transferred residence times for different relative sediment depth (\(d_{b}^{*}\)) values. B) the change in empirical RTD quantiles (10%, 50%, and 90%) versus \(d_{b}^{*}\) values.
Figure 2: Empirical CDF (A) and pdf (B) produced for a shallow relative sediment depth (\(d_{b}^{*}=0.5\)) fitted to different CDFs and pdfs of the selected analytical distributions. The best-fitting analytical distribution (GAM) is found using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
Figure 3: Empirical CDF (A) and pdf (B) produced for a shallow relative sediment depth (\(d_{b}^{*}=1.5\)) fitted to different CDFs and pdfs of the selected distributions. The best-fitting analytical distribution (LN) is found using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
Figure 4: Empirical CDF (A) and pdf (B) produced for a shallow relative sediment depth (\(d_{b}^{*}=8\)) fitted to different CDFs and pdfs of the selected distributions. The best-fitting analytical distribution (FR) is found using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
Figure \(5\): Values of distributions parameters (Gamma (A), Log-Normal (B), Fréchet (C), and Exponential (D)) as a function of the relative sediment depth (\(d_{b}^{*}\)). The estimated parameters (markers) are found using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and predicted values (lines) are calculated with the formulae in Table \(2\).
Figure \(6\): Comparison between the Damköhler number of respiration and denitrification (\(\text{Da}_{\text{rp}}\)and \(\text{Da}_{\text{dn}}\), respectively) calculated at different \(d_{b}^{*}\) from the empirical RTD (\(\text{Da}_{\text{Emp}}\)), and the ones calculated by different analytical representations (\(\text{Da}_{\text{GAM}}\),\(\text{Da}_{\text{LN}}\), \(\text{Da}_{\text{FR}}\), and\(\text{Da}_{\text{EXP}}\)).